Displayed pack prices versus standardized unit prices in Riyadh online supermarkets: implications for public health price monitoring

Background Online supermarket price comparisons can change when products are assessed by displayed pack price rather than a common quantity denominator. Methods This cross-sectional digital food-environment audit examined seven anonymized supermarkets’ official e-commerce websites serving Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The category-level dataset comprised 241 rows representing 24,521 displayed items. A purposively constructed item-level subset preserved coverage across major food and beverage groups; 505 records were reviewed, 503 had a visible price, and 489 had complete and internally consistent price and package-size information for verified conversion to SAR/100 g or SAR/100 mL. The same 489 records were used to summarize pack price, package size, and standardized unit price by healthfulness. Secondary log-linear regressions used HC3 robust standard errors. Results Nutrient-poor categories had a lower item-count-weighted mean displayed pack price than nutrient-dense categories (14.62 vs. 18.30 SAR), although category medians were similar. Within the same item-level sample, nutrient-poor solids had a lower median pack price (11.63 vs. 12.95 SAR), a smaller median package size (150 vs. 520 g), and a higher median standardized price (7.75 vs. 2.49 SAR/100 g) than nutrient-dense solids. Nutrient-poor liquids showed the same descriptive pattern (4.93 vs. 8.50 SAR/pack; 250 vs. 1,000 mL; 1.97 vs. 0.85 SAR/100 mL). In adjusted models, nutrient-poor categories did not show a clear difference in displayed pack price relative to nutrient-dense categories (−4.3%; 95% CI, −21.8 to 17.2%; p = 0.673), whereas nutrient-poor solid items had a higher standardized unit price (+157.3%; 95% CI, 76.5 to 274.9%; p < 0.001). Conclusion Pack price and standardized unit price provide complementary views of digital retail prices. In this Riyadh snapshot, smaller typical package sizes among nutrient-poor items accompanied lower pack prices but higher prices per standardized quantity. These findings concern price measurement and monitoring and do not establish affordability, purchasing, or annual market effects.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Public Health
Published
2026-11-02
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2026.1970439
Primary Topic
Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Displayed pack prices versus standardized unit prices in Riyadh online supermarkets: implications for public health price monitoring

Khalid Aldubayan
1 links
Frontiers in Public Health
Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
article

Displayed pack prices versus standardized unit prices in Riyadh online supermarkets: implications for public health price monitoring

Khalid Aldubayan
article en

Abstract

Background Online supermarket price comparisons can change when products are assessed by displayed pack price rather than a common quantity denominator. Methods This cross-sectional digital food-environment audit examined seven anonymized supermarkets’ official e-commerce websites serving Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The category-level dataset comprised 241 rows representing 24,521 displayed items. A purposively constructed item-level subset preserved coverage across major food and beverage groups; 505 records were reviewed, 503 had a visible price, and 489 had complete and internally consistent price and package-size information for verified conversion to SAR/100 g or SAR/100 mL. The same 489 records were used to summarize pack price, package size, and standardized unit price by healthfulness. Secondary log-linear regressions used HC3 robust standard errors. Results Nutrient-poor categories had a lower item-count-weighted mean displayed pack price than nutrient-dense categories (14.62 vs. 18.30 SAR), although category medians were similar. Within the same item-level sample, nutrient-poor solids had a lower median pack price (11.63 vs. 12.95 SAR), a smaller median package size (150 vs. 520 g), and a higher median standardized price (7.75 vs. 2.49 SAR/100 g) than nutrient-dense solids. Nutrient-poor liquids showed the same descriptive pattern (4.93 vs. 8.50 SAR/pack; 250 vs. 1,000 mL; 1.97 vs. 0.85 SAR/100 mL). In adjusted models, nutrient-poor categories did not show a clear difference in displayed pack price relative to nutrient-dense categories (−4.3%; 95% CI, −21.8 to 17.2%; p = 0.673), whereas nutrient-poor solid items had a higher standardized unit price (+157.3%; 95% CI, 76.5 to 274.9%; p < 0.001). Conclusion Pack price and standardized unit price provide complementary views of digital retail prices. In this Riyadh snapshot, smaller typical package sizes among nutrient-poor items accompanied lower pack prices but higher prices per standardized quantity. These findings concern price measurement and monitoring and do not establish affordability, purchasing, or annual market effects.

Frontiers in Public HealthVol. 14
King Saud University (SA)
Zero hunger
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Consumer Attitudes and Food Labeling
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon
Displayed pack prices versus standardized unit prices in Riyadh online supermarkets: implications for public health price monitoring — Khalid Aldubayan · Frontiers in Public Health (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS