ArticleThe Lancet. Public health2017
Health impact assessment of the UK soft drinks industry levy: a comparative risk assessment modelling study.
Article in The Lancet. Public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
68 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Modeling and empirical evidence of the impact of implementation of sugar sweetened-beverages tax to reduce non-communicable diseases prevalence: a systematic review.Frontiers in nutrition · 2024Pooled it
- Modelling health and economic impact of nutrition interventions: a systematic review.European journal of clinical nutrition · 2023Pooled it
- Sugar Reduction Initiatives in the Eastern Mediterranean Region: A Systematic Review.Nutrients · 2022Pooled it
- Relation between the food environment and oral health-systematic review.European journal of public health · 2022Pooled it
- Sugar sweetened beverages attributable disease burden and the potential impact of policy interventions: a systematic review of epidemiological and decision models.BMC public health · 2021Pooled it
- Hypotheses and evidence related to intense sweeteners and effects on appetite and body weight changes: A scoping review of reviews.PloS one · 2018Pooled it
- Sugar tax and product reformulation proposals reduce the perceived legitimacy of health-promotion institutions: a randomized population-based survey experiment.European journal of public health · 2024Trial
- Who pays and Who benefits? A distributional health-economic evaluation of strengthening the UK soft drinks industry levy.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Article
- Diabetes Mellitus as an Integrated Microbiome, Immune, and Metabolic Disorder with Clinical Implications for Multisystem Complications and Public Health.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Estimating the cost of not setting the Health Promotion Levy at 20% in South Africa: an extended cost-effectiveness analysis.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Examining the association between maternal junk food consumption and obesity among children: evidence from a cross-sectional survey in India.Journal of health, population, and nutrition · 2025Article
- Evidence on the effectiveness and equity of population-based policies to reduce the burden of type 2 diabetes: a narrative review.Diabetologia · 2025Review
- Refined carbohydrates and the overfat pandemic: implications for brain health and public health policy.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- Estimated changes in free sugar consumption one year after the UK soft drinks industry levy came into force: controlled interrupted time series analysis of the National Diet and Nutrition Survey (2011-2019).Journal of epidemiology and community health · 2024Article
- Effective policies to promote sugar reduction in soft drinks: lessons from a comparison of six European countries.European journal of public health · 2023Article
- Article
- A comparative analysis of the cost-utility of the Philippine tax on sweetened beverages as proposed and as implemented.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Article
- Estimated impact of the UK soft drinks industry levy on childhood hospital admissions for carious tooth extractions: interrupted time series analysis.BMJ nutrition, prevention & health · 2023Article
- Projected health and economic impacts of sugar-sweetened beverage taxation in Germany: A cross-validation modelling study.PLoS medicine · 2023Article
- Modeled health economic and equity impact on dental caries and health outcomes from a 20% sugar sweetened beverages tax in Australia.Health economics · 2023Article
8 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn March, 2016, the UK Government proposed a tiered levy on sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs; high tax for drinks with >8 g of sugar per 100 mL, moderate tax for 5-8 g, and no tax for <5 g). We estimate the effect of possible industry responses to the levy on obesity, diabetes, and dental caries.
methodsWe modelled three possible industry responses: reformulation to reduce sugar concentration, an increase of product price, and a change of the market share of high-sugar, mid-sugar, and low-sugar drinks. For each response, we defined a better-case and worse-case health scenario. We developed a comparative risk assessment model to estimate the UK health impact of each scenario on prevalence of obesity and incidence of dental caries and type 2 diabetes. The model combined data for sales and consumption of SSBs, disease incidence and prevalence, price elasticity estimates, and estimates of the association between SSB consumption and disease outcomes. We drew the disease association parameters from a meta-analysis of experimental studies (SSBs and weight change), a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies (type 2 diabetes), and a prospective cohort study (dental caries).
findingsThe best modelled scenario for health is SSB reformulation, resulting in a reduction of 144 383 (95% uncertainty interval 5102-306 743; 0·9%) of 15 470 813 adults and children with obesity in the UK, 19 094 (6920-32 678; incidence reduction of 31·1 per 100 000 person-years) fewer incident cases of type 2 diabetes per year, and 269 375 (82 211-470 928; incidence reduction of 4·4 per 1000 person-years) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. An increase in the price of SSBs in the better-case scenario would result in 81 594 (3588-182 669; 0·5%) fewer adults and children with obesity, 10 861 (3899-18 964; 17·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 149 378 (45 231-262 013; 2·4) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. Changes to market share to increase the proportion of low-sugar drinks sold in the better-case scenario would result in 91 042 (4289-204 903; 0·6%) fewer adults and children with diabetes, 1528 (4414-21 785; 19·7) fewer incident cases of diabetes per year, and 172 718 (47 919-294 499; 2·8) fewer decayed, missing, or filled teeth annually. The greatest benefit for obesity and oral health would be among individuals aged younger than 18 years, with people aged older than 65 years having the largest absolute decreases in diabetes incidence.
interpretationThe health impact of the soft drinks levy is dependent on its implementation by industry. Uncertainty exists as to how industry will react and about estimation of health outcomes. Health gains could be maximised by substantial product reformulation, with additional benefits possible if the levy is passed on to purchasers through raising of the price of high-sugar and mid-sugar drinks and activities to increase the market share of low-sugar products.
fundingNone.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.