Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31543983›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2019

The distributional impact of taxing sugar-sweetened beverages: findings from an extended cost-effectiveness analysis in South Africa.

Akshar Saxena, Nicholas Stacey, Paula Del Ray Puech, Caroline Mudara, Karen Hofman, Stéphane Verguet

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 24 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Akshar SaxenaEconomics, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore.ORCID 0000-0001-8518-0466
Nicholas StaceySAMRC/Wits Center for Health Economics and Decision Science - PRICELESS SA School of Public Health Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-3572-5314
Paula Del Ray PuechDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Caroline MudaraSAMRC/Wits Center for Health Economics and Decision Science - PRICELESS SA School of Public Health Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Karen HofmanSAMRC/Wits Center for Health Economics and Decision Science - PRICELESS SA School of Public Health Faculty of Health Sciences, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Stéphane VerguetDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4128-0849
South African Medical Research Council · ZAHarvard Global Health Institute · USNanyang Technological University · SG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFacing increasing obesity prevalence and obesity-related disease burden, South Africa has devised an obesity prevention strategy that includes a recently implemented tax on the sugar content of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB). We assess the potential distributional impact (across socioeconomic groups) of this tax on type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) incidence and associated mortality and its financial burden on households.

methodsWe conducted an extended cost-effectiveness analysis of the new 10% tax on SSBs in South Africa, and estimated: the averted premature deaths related to T2DM, the financial benefits to households (out-of-pocket (OOP) medical costs and indirect costs due to productivity losses averted), the increased government tax revenues and healthcare savings for the government, all across income quintiles.

findingsA 10% SSB tax increase would avert an estimated 8000 T2DM-related premature deaths over 20 years, with most deaths averted among the third and fourth income quintiles. The government would save about South African rand (ZAR) 2 billion (US$140 million) in subsidised healthcare over 20 years; and would raise ZAR6 billion (US$450 million) in tax revenues per annum. The bottom two quintiles would bear the smallest tax burden increase (36% of the additional taxes). The bottom two income quintiles would also have the lowest savings in OOP payments due to significant subsidisation provided by government healthcare. Lastly, an estimated 32 000 T2DM-related cases of catastrophic expenditures and 12 000 cases of poverty would be averted.

conclusionsSSB taxation would have a substantial distributional impact on obesity-related premature deaths, cost savings to the government and the financial outcomes of South Africa's population.

Indexed as

diabetes mellitusdistributional impactequityextended cost-effectiveness analysissoda taxSouth Africasugar-sweetened beverages

Identifiers

PMID31543983
PMCPMC6730580
OpenAlexW2969579482

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.