Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30554446›Full record

Observational studyAddiction (Abingdon, England)2019

Pricing of tobacco products during, and after, the introduction of standardized packaging: an observational study of retail price data from independent and convenience (small) retailers in the United Kingdom.

Nathan Critchlow, Martine Stead, Crawford Moodie, Kathryn Angus, Douglas Eadie, Anne Marie MacKintosh

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Nathan CritchlowInstitute for Social Marketing, and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9145-8874
Martine SteadInstitute for Social Marketing, and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, UK.
Crawford MoodieInstitute for Social Marketing, and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, UK.
Kathryn AngusInstitute for Social Marketing, and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, UK.
Douglas EadieInstitute for Social Marketing, and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, UK.
Anne Marie MacKintoshInstitute for Social Marketing, and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport, University of Stirling, Scotland, UK.
University of Stirling · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 15192Cancer Research UK 20456Cancer Research UK 22568Cancer Research UK C24178/A22568Medical Research Council MR/K023195/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsTobacco companies claimed that standardized packaging, phased in/introduced May 2016-May 2017, would reduce prices and increase consumption. We: (1) describe changes in price-per-cigarette and price-per-gram during, and after, the introduction of standardized packaging; (2) describe price changes by cigarette price segment; and (3) analyse price changes by stage of implementation.

designAn observational study, using electronic point-of-sale data, monitored price trends in three periods: (1) May-September 2016, start of transition period; (2) October 2016-May 2017, when fully branded and standardized products were sold and duty escalators implemented; and (3) June-October 2017, when standardized packaging was mandatory.

settingUnited Kingdom.

participantsSmall retailers (n = 500) stratified by region and deprivation. Data were monitored for 20 leading fully branded tobacco products [15 factory-made cigarettes (FMC), 5 roll-your-own (RYO)] and their standardized equivalents. MEASUREMENT: Price-per-cigarette and price-per-gram, based on monthly average Recommended Retail Price (RRP) and actual sale price, adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Pricing Index (CPIH). Net changes (£GBP, %) were analysed by product type (FMC versus RYO) and FMC price segment (value, mid-price, premium).

findingsBetween May 2016 and October 2017, the average inflation-adjusted RRP/price-per-cigarette and price-per-gram increased for FMC (all price segments) and RYO. For example, sales price-per-cigarette increased +4.64%, with the largest increases for value (+6.81%), premium (+5.32%) and mid-price FMCs (+3.30%). Net sales price-per-cigarette and price-per-gram increases were largest in period 2, when fully branded and standardized products were sold and duty escalators were implemented (FMC = +4.70%; RYO = +3.75%). There were small decreases in sales price-per-cigarette and price-per-gram once standardized packaging became mandatory (FMC = -1.14%; RYO = -0.88%).

conclusionIn the United Kingdom, the price of leading roll-your-own and factory-made cigarette brands sold by small retailers increased as standardized packaging was phased in, with increases larger than expected through duty escalation.

Indexed as

Costs and Cost AnalysisCigarette SmokingHumansProduct PackagingTobacco ProductsUnited KingdomPlain packagingpricestandardized packagingtobaccotobacco marketingtobacco price strategy

Identifiers

PMID30554446
PMCPMC6491979
OpenAlexW2904098441

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.