ArticleBMC public health2019
Exploring the characteristics of newly defined at-risk drinkers following the change to the UK low risk drinking guidelines: a retrospective analysis using Health Survey for England data.
Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Alcohol and alcoholism associated neurological disorders: Current updates in a global perspective and recent recommendations.World journal of experimental medicine · 2025Review
- Prevalence, demographic, socio-economic, and lifestyle factors associated with cigarette, e-cigarette, and dual use: evidence from the 2017-2021 Scottish Health Survey.Internal and emergency medicine · 2024Article
- Health factors that influence sustainable behaviour in a single-player resource management game.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Alcohol use as a predictor of the course of major depressive disorder: a prospective population-based study.Epidemiology and psychiatric sciences · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAlcohol guidelines enable individuals to make informed choices about drinking and assist healthcare practitioners to identify and treat at-risk drinkers. The UK Low Risk Drinking Guidelines were revised in 2016 and the weekly guideline for men was reduced from 21 to 14 units per week. This study sought to retrospectively establish 1) the number of additional at-risk male drinkers in England, 2) which demographic characteristics were associated with being an at-risk drinker under the previous versus new guidelines.
methodsAverage weekly alcohol consumption for men aged 16+ from the cross-sectional nationally representative Health Survey for England were used to 1) calculate annual population prevalence estimates for newly defined at-risk (> 14 to ≤21 units/week) male drinkers from 2011 to 2015 (N = 3487-3790), and 2) conduct logistic regression analyses for at-risk vs low risk male drinkers under the previous (> 21 vs ≤21 units/week) and new (> 14 vs ≤14 units/week) guidelines to assess characteristics associated with being at-risk drinkers under each guideline using 2015 data (N = 2982).
resultsPopulation prevalence estimates of newly defined at-risk drinkers ranged from 10.2% (2014 = 2,182,401 men)-11.2% (2011 = 2,322,896 men). Under the new guidelines, men aged 55-74 (OR = 1.63,95% CI = 1.25-2.12); men in managerial/professional occupations (OR = 1.64,95% CI = 1.34-2.00); current smokers (OR = 2.26,95% CI = 1.73-2.94), ex-regular smokers (OR = 2.01,95% CI = 1.63-2.47) and ex-occasional smokers (OR = 1.85,95% CI = 1.25-2.74); men from the North East (OR = 2.08,95% CI = 1.38-3.13) and North West (OR = 1.91,95% CI = 1.41-2.60) of England all had greater odds, and non-white men had reduced odds (OR = 0.53,95% CI = 0.34-0.80) of being at-risk drinkers, as they had under the previous guidelines. Under the new guidelines only: a higher percentage of at-risk drinkers aged 16-34 (32% vs 19%) attenuated the odds of men aged 35-54 being at-risk (OR = 1.18,95% CI = 0.92-1.51); a higher percentage of married at-risk drinkers (37% vs 24%) attenuated the odds of single men being at-risk (OR = 1.28,95% CI = 0.99-1.67); men from the West Midlands (OR = 1.68,95% CI = 1.17-2.42) and London (OR = 1.53,95% CI = 1.03-2.28) had greater odds of being at-risk drinkers.
conclusionsThe change to the Low Risk Drinking Guidelines would have resulted in more than 2 million additional male at-risk drinkers in England. Most groups with greater odds of being at-risk drinkers under the new guidelines were those already known to be drinking the most, strengthening the case for targeted screening and education. Additionally, under the new guidelines, a marked proportion of 16-35 year olds and married men were at-risk and men in the West Midlands and London had greater odds of being at-risk drinkers. These groups may benefit from specific education around the new Low Risk Drinking Guidelines.
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.