Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31931800›Full record

ArticleBMC medicine2020

Reductions in sugar sales from soft drinks in the UK from 2015 to 2018.

L K Bandy, P Scarborough, R A Harrington, M Rayner, S A Jebb

Abstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 81 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
81citing 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

81 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

21 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

L K BandyCentre on Population Approaches for NCD Prevention, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, BDI Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, UK. lauren.bandy@ndph.ox.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-5551-8390
P ScarboroughCentre on Population Approaches for NCD Prevention, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, BDI Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, UK.
R A HarringtonCentre on Population Approaches for NCD Prevention, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, BDI Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, UK.
M RaynerCentre on Population Approaches for NCD Prevention, Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, BDI Building, Old Road Campus, Oxford, OX3 7FZ, UK.
S A JebbNuffield Department of Primary Health Care Sciences, Radcliffe Primary Care Building, Radcliffe Observatory Quarter, University of Oxford, Woodstock Road, Oxford, OX2 6GG, UK.

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/15/34/31656Department of Health 16/130/01National Institute for Health Research 16/130/01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe consumption of free sugars in the UK is more than double the guideline intake for adults and close to triple for children, with soft drinks representing a significant proportion. The aim of this study was to assess how individual soft drink companies and consumers have responded to calls to reduce sugar consumption, including the soft drink industry levy (SDIL), between 2015 and 2018.

methodsThis was an annual cross-sectional study using nutrient composition data of 7377 products collected online, paired with volume sales data for 195 brands offered by 57 companies. The main outcome measures were sales volume, sugar content and volume of sugars sold by company and category, expressed in total and per capita per day terms.

resultsBetween 2015 and 2018, the volume of sugars sold per capita per day from soft drinks declined by 30%, equivalent to a reduction of 4.6 g per capita per day. The sales-weighted mean sugar content of soft drinks fell from 4.4 g/100 ml in 2015 to 2.9 g/100 ml in 2018. The total volume sales of soft drinks that are subject to the SDIL (i.e. contain more than 5 g/100 ml of sugar) fell by 50%, while volume sales of low- and zero-sugar (< 5 g/100 ml) drinks rose by 40%.

conclusionAction by the soft drinks industry to reduce sugar in products and change their product portfolios, coupled with changes in consumer purchasing, has led to a significant reduction in the total volume and per capita sales of sugars sold in soft drinks in the UK. The rate of change accelerated between 2017 and 2018, which also implies that the implementation of the SDIL acted as an extra incentive for companies to reformulate above and beyond what was already being done as part of voluntary commitments to reformulation, or changes in sales driven by consumer preferences.

Indexed as

Carbonated BeveragesCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHistory, 21st CenturyHumansMaleSugarsUnited KingdomSugarsIndustryPublic health policyReformulationSoft drinksSugar reduction

Identifiers

PMID31931800
PMCPMC6956503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.