Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28118411›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Analysis of Alcohol Industry Submissions against Marketing Regulation.

Florentine Petronella Martino, Peter Graeme Miller, Kerri Coomber, Linda Hancock, Kypros Kypri

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 33 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed
10.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Corporate Political Activity: Taxonomies and Model of Corporate Influence on Public Policy.International journal of health policy and management · 2023
    Article
  14. Nutrition-Related Information on Alcoholic Beverages in Victoria, Australia, 2021.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. The importance of psychology for shaping legal cannabis regulation.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2021
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Florentine Petronella MartinoSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Peter Graeme MillerSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Kerri CoomberSchool of Psychology, Faculty of Health, Deakin University, Geelong, Australia.
Linda HancockSchool of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Arts & Education, Deakin University, Melbourne, Australia.
Kypros KypriSchool of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.
Deakin University · AUUniversity of Otago · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A growing body of literature points to the role of vested interests as a barrier to the implementation of effective public health policies. Corporate political activity by the alcohol industry is commonly used to influence policy and regulation. It is important for policy makers to be able to critique alcohol industry claims opposed to improved alcohol marketing regulation. The Australian National Preventive Health Agency reviewed alcohol marketing regulations in 2012 and stakeholders were invited to comment on them. In this study we used thematic analysis to examine submissions from the Australian alcohol industry, based on a system previously developed in relation to tobacco industry corporate political activity. The results show that submissions were a direct lobbying tactic, making claims to government that were contrary to the evidence-base. Five main frames were identified, in which the alcohol industry claimed that increased regulation: (1) is unnecessary; (2) is not backed up by sufficient evidence; (3) will lead to unintended negative consequences; and (4) faces legal barriers to implementation; underpinned by the view (5) that the industry consists of socially responsible companies working toward reducing harmful drinking. In contrast with tobacco industry submissions on public policy, which often focused on legal and economic barriers, the Australian alcohol industry placed a heavier emphasis on notions of regulatory redundancy and insufficient evidence. This may reflect differences in where these industries sit on the 'regulatory pyramid', alcohol being less regulated than tobacco.

Indexed as

Alcoholic BeveragesLobbyingAdolescentAdvertisingAlcoholismAustraliaChildChild, PreschoolConflict of InterestFemaleHumansMarketingMass MediaPolicy MakingPregnancyPublic Policy

Identifiers

PMID28118411
PMCPMC5261775
OpenAlexW2580658897

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.