ArticleBMC public health2019
Perceptions of the possible health and economic impacts of Seattle's sugary beverage tax.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unraveling the nexus between fiscal policy uncertainty, environmental taxation, and life expectancy.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Impact of the Philadelphia Beverage Tax on Perceived Beverage Healthfulness, Tax Awareness, and Tax Opinions.Journal of nutrition education and behavior · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Seattle's sweetened beverage tax on tax support and perceived economic and health impacts.Preventive medicine reports · 2022Article
- Impacts of the Seattle Sweetened Beverage Tax on the Perceived Healthfulness of Sweetened Beverages.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Evaluation of Changes in Beverage Prices and Volume Sold Following the Implementation and Repeal of a Sweetened Beverage Tax in Cook County, Illinois.JAMA network open · 2020Article
- Is the public sweet on sugary beverages? Social desirability bias and sweetened beverage taxes.Economics and human biology · 2020Article
- The Navajo Nation Healthy Diné Nation Act: Community Support of a 2% Tax on Unhealthy Foods.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTaxes on sugary beverages are an emerging strategy to improve health by reducing consumption and raising revenues to support community wellbeing. However, taxes may have unintended consequences, and perceptions of these consequences may affect attitudes towards this policy.
methodsIn June 2017, the Seattle City Council passed an ordinance imposing a tax on sugary beverages, effective January 1, 2018. Between October and December 2017, we recruited 851 adults in Seattle to complete a survey (telephone or online) about support for the tax and their perceptions of tax-related health and economic impacts. We first analyzed data for the full sample. We then tested for differences in participants' responses by household income level (< 260% Federal Poverty Level [FPL], ≥ 260% FPL) and across race/ethnicities using chi-square tests. Analyses used population weights and adjusted for multiple comparisons, using the Holm-Bonferroni Sequential Correction (p < 0.01).
resultsA majority of participants supported the sugary beverage tax (59%; 95% Confidence Interval [CI]: 55, 63%) and believed that the tax would improve public health (56%; CI: 52, 60%). Most participants believed that the tax would not negatively affect small businesses (52%; CI: 48, 56%) nor result in job loss (66%; CI: 62, 70%). Most participants also perceived that the tax would not negatively impact their own finances (79%; CI: 75, 82%). However, fewer lower-income (48%; CI: 42, 53%), versus higher-income participants (61%; CI: 55, 66%), perceived that the tax would improve public health, would not result in job loss (lower-income: 58%; CI: 53, 64%; higher-income: 71%; CI: 66, 75%) and would not negatively affect their own finances (lower-income: 68%; CI: 62, 73%; higher-income: 85%; CI: 81, 88%). Compared to non-Hispanic Whites, (82%; CI: 79, 86%), a smaller proportion of non-Hispanic Blacks (63%; 95% CI: 48, 75%), and Hispanics (67%; 95% CI: 51, 79%), perceived that the tax would have negative consequences for their own family finances.
conclusionsA majority of respondents supported the sugary beverage tax in Seattle. Lower-income participants were more concerned about potential financial consequences. Further evaluation of the extent to which unintended consequences occur is needed.
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.