Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31320459›Full record

ArticleJournal of epidemiology and community health2019

Quantifying the impact of the Public Health Responsibility Deal on salt intake, cardiovascular disease and gastric cancer burdens: interrupted time series and microsimulation study.

Anthony A Laverty, Chris Kypridemos, Paraskevi Seferidi, Eszter P Vamos, Jonathan Pearson-Stuttard, Brendan Collins, Simon Capewell, Modi Mwatsama, Paul Cairney, Kate Fleming and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of epidemiology and community health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Simulated retail food environments: A literature review of systems science approaches to advance equity in access to healthy diets.Obesity reviews : an official journal of the International Association for the Study of Obesity · 2025
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

12 authors.

Anthony A LavertyPublic Health Policy Evaluation Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK a.laverty@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0003-1318-8439
Chris KypridemosDepartment of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Paraskevi SeferidiPublic Health Policy Evaluation Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Eszter P VamosPublic Health Policy Evaluation Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Jonathan Pearson-StuttardDepartment of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Brendan CollinsDepartment of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3023-8189
Simon CapewellDepartment of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Modi MwatsamaUK Health Forum, London, UK.
Paul CairneyDepartment of History and Politics, University of Stirling, Stirling, Scotland.
Kate FlemingDepartment of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Martin O'FlahertyDepartment of Public Health and Policy, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Christopher MillettPublic Health Policy Evaluation Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

Department of Health RP_2014-04-032Medical Research Council G0900847Medical Research Council MR/K006665/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2011, England introduced the Public Health Responsibility Deal (RD), a public-private partnership (PPP) which gave greater freedom to the food industry to set and monitor targets for salt intakes. We estimated the impact of the RD on trends in salt intake and associated changes in cardiovascular disease (CVD) and gastric cancer (GCa) incidence, mortality and economic costs in England from 2011-2025.

methodsWe used interrupted time series models with 24 hours' urine sample data and the IMPACT

resultsBetween 2003 and 2010 mean salt intake was falling annually by 0.20 grams/day among men and 0.12 g/d among women (P-value for trend both < 0.001). After RD implementation in 2011, annual declines in salt intake slowed statistically significantly to 0.11 g/d among men and 0.07 g/d among women (P-values for differences in trend both P < 0.001). We estimated that the RD has been responsible for approximately 9900 (interquartile quartile range (IQR): 6700 to 13,000) additional cases of CVD and 1500 (IQR: 510 to 2300) additional cases of GCa between 2011 and 2018. If the RD continues unchanged between 2019 and 2025, approximately 26 000 (IQR: 20 000 to 31,000) additional cases of CVD and 3800 (IQR: 2200 to 5300) cases of GCa may occur.

interpretationPublic-private partnerships such as the RD which lack robust and independent target setting, monitoring and enforcement are unlikely to produce optimal health gains.

Indexed as

Food IndustryNutrition PolicyAdultCardiovascular DiseasesDiet, Sodium-RestrictedEnglandFeeding BehaviorFemaleHealth PromotionHumansInterrupted Time Series AnalysisMaleMiddle AgedPublic HealthQuality-Adjusted Life YearsSocial BehaviorSodium Chloride, Dietarycardiovascular diseasechd/coronorary heartdietpolicy

Identifiers

PMID31320459
PMCPMC6820143

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.