ArticleEuropean journal of clinical nutrition2020
The sugar content of children's and lunchbox beverages sold in the UK before and after the soft drink industry levy.
Article in European journal of clinical nutrition, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Outcomes Following Taxation of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Pooled it
- The UK Food Environment: A Systematic Review of Domains, Methodologies, and Outcomes.Current developments in nutrition · 2025Review
- Effectiveness of implemented global dietary interventions: a scoping review of fiscal policies.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Exploring the sugar-sweetened beverage tax (SSBT) pass-through rate in the Irish hospitality sector.BMC public health · 2024Article
- A comparative analysis of the cost-utility of the Philippine tax on sweetened beverages as proposed and as implemented.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Article
- Article
- An examination of Ireland's sugar sweetened beverage tax (sugar tax) in practice.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundChildhood obesity is associated with an increased intake of sugary soft drinks and juice drinks. The aims of this study were (1) to report the sugar and energy content in commercial fruit juice (FJ), juice drinks (JDs) and smoothies (S) specifically targeted at children in the UK, (2) to identify beverages liable for the soft drinks industry levy (SDIL) and (3) to compare the amount of sugar in these beverages before and after the levy.
methodsThe beverages were retrieved using the online shopping tool, my Supermarket, websites of nine major supermarkets in the UK and manufacturers webpages. Comparisons of sugar content were taken before and after the introduction of the SDIL.
results131 FJJDS fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The mean sugar content of all the beverages was 6.3 g ± 4.5/100 mL. There was large variation in the sugar content from 0.1 g/100 mL to 15.2 g/100 mL, with smoothies found to contain the most sugar (11.55 ± 1.62 g/mL). The beverages were reanalysed in September 2018 to determine their eligibility for the SDIL. Of the 131 products only seven JDs were eligible for the levy. Four of these beverages had reformulated their ingredients since the initial analysis resulting in a sugar content of <5 g/100 mL.
conclusionsThe majority of the beverages targeted at children and children's lunch boxes were not eligible for the SDIL. This study suggests the necessity to adapt the SDIL to include all FJJDS aimed at children as the total sugar content of these beverages are still above the recommended quantities for this age group.
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.