Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28011653›Full record

ArticleHealth promotion international2018

Framing the policy debate over spirits excise tax in Poland.

Mateusz Zatonski, Benjamin Hawkins, Martin McKee

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Health promotion international, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Unrecorded alcohol consumption in Lithuania: a modelling study for 2000-2021.Alcohol and alcoholism (Oxford, Oxfordshire) · 2023
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. China's Changing Alcohol Market and Need for an Enhanced Policy Response: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Mateusz ZatonskiHealth Promotion Foundation, Warsaw, Poland.
Benjamin HawkinsLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK.
Martin McKeeLondon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, 15-17 Tavistock Place, London WC1H 9SH, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Industry lobbying remains an obstacle to effective health-oriented alcohol policy. In 2013, an increase in excise tax on spirits was announced by the Polish government. This article presents a qualitative analysis of the public debate that ensued on the potential economic, health and social effects of the policy. It focuses on how competing groups, including industry actors, framed their position and sought to dominate the debate. Online archives of five Polish national newspapers, two spirits trade associations, and parliamentary and ministerial archives were searched. A thematic content analysis of the identified sources was conducted. The overall findings were compared with existing research on the framing of the Minimum Unit Pricing (MUP) debate in the UK. A total of 155 sources were analysed. Two main frames were identified: health, and economic. The spirits industry successfully promoted the economic frame in their own publications and in the media. The debate was dominated by arguments about potential growth of the grey market and losses in tax revenue that might result from the excise tax increase. The framing of the debate in Poland differed from the framing of the MUP debate in the United Kingdom. The Polish public health community was unsuccessful in making health considerations a significant element of the alcohol policy debate. The strategies pursued by UK health advocates offer lessons for how to make a more substantial impact on media coverage and promote health-oriented legislation.

Indexed as

Alcoholic BeveragesCommerceCosts and Cost AnalysisDissent and DisputesHumansIndustryLobbyingPolandPublic PolicyQualitative ResearchTaxesUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID28011653
PMCPMC6005036

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.