ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2019
Cost Effectiveness of Nutrition Policies on Processed Meat: Implications for Cancer Burden in the U.S.
Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Prospects of Food Taxes for Planetary Health: A Systematic Review of Modeling Studies.Nutrition reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The current and future costs of colorectal cancer attributable to red and processed meat consumption in Brazil.BMC health services research · 2023Pooled it
- Accounting for Nonhealth and Future Costs in Cost-Effectiveness Analysis: Distributional Impacts of a US Cancer Prevention Strategy.PharmacoEconomics · 2023Article
- The burden of cardiovascular disease attributable to dietary risk factors in the provinces of China, 2002-2018: a nationwide population-based study.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2023Article
- Article
- Impact of Reducing Intake of Red and Processed Meat on Colorectal Cancer Incidence in Germany 2020 to 2050-A Simulation Study.Nutrients · 2023Article
- Support policies that foster a healthy food environment and incentivize healthy food purchases to mitigate cancer inequities.Translational behavioral medicine · 2021Article
- Disparities in Health and Economic Burdens of Cancer Attributable to Suboptimal Diet in the United States, 2015‒2018.American journal of public health · 2021Article
- Simulation Modeling for the Economic Evaluation of Population-Based Dietary Policies: A Systematic Scoping Review.Advances in nutrition (Bethesda, Md.) · 2021Article
- Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Nutrition Facts Added-Sugar Labeling and Obesity-Associated Cancer Rates in the US.JAMA network open · 2021Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of a National Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Tax to Reduce Cancer Burdens and Disparities in the United States.JNCI cancer spectrum · 2020Article
- Legal Feasibility of US Government Policies to Reduce Cancer Risk by Reducing Intake of Processed Meat.The Milbank quarterly · 2019Article
- Development and Validation of the US Diabetes, Obesity, Cardiovascular Disease Microsimulation (DOC-M) Model: Health Disparity and Economic Impact Model.Medical decision making : an international journal of the Society for Medical Decision MakingArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionProcessed meats are associated with increased risk of colorectal and stomach cancers, but health and economic impacts of policies to discourage processed meats are not well established. This paper aims to evaluate the cost effectiveness of implementing tax and warning labels on processed meats.
methodsA probabilistic cohort-state transition model was developed in 2018, including lifetime and short-term horizons, healthcare, and societal perspectives, and 3% discount rates for costs and health outcomes. The model simulated 32 subgroups by age, gender, and race/ethnicity from the U.S. adult population and integrated nationally representative 2011-2014 data on processed meat consumption, with etiologic effects of processed meat consumption on cancer incidence, medical and indirect societal costs, and policy costs.
resultsOver a lifetime, the 10% excise tax would prevent 77,000 cases of colorectal cancer (95% uncertainty interval=56,800, 107,000) and 12,500 cases of stomach cancer (95% uncertainty interval=6,880, 23,900), add 593,000 quality-adjusted life years (95% uncertainty interval=419,000, 827,000), and generate net savings of $2.7 billion from a societal perspective, including $1.1 billion healthcare costs saved. The warning label policy would avert 85,400 cases of colorectal cancer (95% uncertainty interval=56,600, 141,000) and 15,000 cases of stomach cancer (95% uncertainty interval=6,860, 34,500), and add 660,000 quality-adjusted life years (95% uncertainty interval=418,000, 1,070,000), with net savings of $4.5 billion from a societal perspective, including $1.3 billion healthcare costs saved. In subgroup analyses, greater health and economic benefits accrued to (1) younger subpopulations, (2) subpopulations with greater cancer risk, and (3) those with higher baseline processed meat consumption.
conclusionsThe model shows that implementing tax or warning labels on processed meats would be a cost-saving strategy with substantial health and economic benefits. The findings should encourage policy makers to consider nutrition-related policies to reduce cancer burden.
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.