ArticleBMJ open2019
Evaluating possible intended and unintended consequences of the implementation of alcohol minimum unit pricing (MUP) in Scotland: a natural experiment protocol.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The behaviour of alcohol-dependent drinkers of spirits during level 4 COVID-19 lockdown in Auckland, New Zealand.Drug and alcohol review · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Minimum Unit Pricing of Alcohol: A Mixed Method Natural Experiment in Scotland.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionScotland is the first country to carry out a national implementation of minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol. MUP aims to reduce alcohol-related harms, which are high in Scotland compared with Western Europe, and to improve health equalities. MUP is a minimum retail price per unit of alcohol. That approach targets high-risk alcohol users. This work is key to a wider evaluation that will determine whether MUP continues. There are three study components. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Component 1 sampled an estimated 2800 interviewees at a baseline and each of two follow-ups from four Emergency Departments in Scotland and Northern England. Research nurses administered a standardised survey to assess alcohol consumption and the proportion of attendances that were alcohol-related.Component 2 covered six Sexual Health Clinics with similar timings and country allocation. A self-completion survey gathered information on potential unintended effects of MUP on alcohol source and drug use.Using a natural experiment design and repeated cross-sectional audit, difference between Scotland (intervention) and North England (control) will be tested for outcomes using regression adjusting for differences at baseline. Differential impacts by age, gender and socioeconomic position will be investigated.Component 3 used focus groups with young people and heavy drinkers and interviews with stakeholders before and after MUP implementation. The focus groups will allow exploration of attitudes, experiences and behaviours and the potential mechanisms by which impacts arise. The interviews will help characterise the implementation process. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Study components 1 and 2 have been ethically approved by the NHS, and component 3 by the University of Stirling. Dissemination plans include peer-reviewed journal articles, presentations, policy maker briefings and, in view of high public interest and the high political profile of this flagship policy, communication with the public via media engagement and plain language summaries. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN16039407; Pre-results.
Indexed as
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.