ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2020
Demographic Groups Likely Affected by Regulating Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Portion Sizes.
Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sugar Content and Warning Criteria Evaluation for Popular Sugar-Sweetened Beverages in Taipei, Taiwan.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Article
- Sugar Content of Market Beverages and Children's Sugar Intake from Beverages in Beijing, China.Nutrients · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionSugar-sweetened beverages are a key driver of obesity. Portion-size regulations typically limit the volume of unsealed sugar-sweetened beverage containers to 16 fluid ounces. These regulations could reduce sugar-sweetened beverage consumption, but whom these policies would affect remains unknown. This study evaluates demographic groups likely affected by hypothetical national portion-size regulations modeled on policy language and scopes from New York City and California.
methodsData from adults (aged 18-65 years, n=6,594) in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (2013‒2016) were used to classify individuals as likely affected if they consumed a sugar-sweetened beverage larger than 16 fluid ounces from a potentially regulated food source during at least 1 eating occasion. Two classifications of affected food sources were evaluated: (1) excluding convenience stores (New York City scope) and (2) including convenience stores (California scope). In 2020, analyses were conducted using logistic regression to examine associations between affected status and age (<35 and ≥35 years), sex, race/ethnicity (white, non-Hispanic, black, non-Hispanic, andHispanic), education (without college degree and with college degree), and income (≤185% and >185% of the federal poverty line).
resultsPortion-size regulations would affect 8.87% of adults (New York City scope) and 14.71% of adults (California scope). Regulations had a greater potential effect on adults who were aged <35 years, male, and without a college degree (all p<0.05). Differences between demographic groups would be larger in magnitude using California's policy scope.
conclusionsPortion-size regulations would likely have a greater effect on younger, male, and less-educated adults. Policy effects would likely be larger if these regulations are written to encompass more food sources.
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.