ArticleBMC public health2021
Equity of expenditure changes associated with a sweetened-beverage tax in Tonga: repeated cross-sectional household surveys.
Article in BMC public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sugar, power and policy: The political economy of a health and economic 'win-win' in Fiji's sugar-sweetened beverage tax.Globalization and health · 2025Article
- Changes in household purchasing of soft drinks following the UK soft drinks industry levy by household income and composition: controlled interrupted time series analysis, March 2014 to November 2019.BMJ nutrition, prevention & health · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of implemented global dietary interventions: a scoping review of fiscal policies.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Article
- The Impact of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes by Household Income: A Multi-City Comparison of Nielsen Purchasing Data.Nutrients · 2022Article
- Barriers and facilitators to the introduction of import duties designed to prevent noncommunicable disease in Tonga: a case study.Globalization and health · 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
7 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to examine changes in beverage expenditure patterns before and after a T$0.50/L sweetened-beverage (SB) excise was introduced in Tonga in 2013, by household income, household age composition and island of residence.
methodsTwo cross-sectional surveys involved households being randomly sampled (the Household Income and Expenditure Surveys in 2009 (n = 1982) and 2015/16 (n = 1800)). Changes in soft drink (taxed), bottled water, and milk (both untaxed) expenditure were examined namely: (i) prevalence of households purchasing the beverage; (ii) average expenditure per person (inflation-adjusted); (iii) expenditure as a proportion of household food budget; and (iv) expenditure per person as a proportion of equivalised income.
resultsThe pattern found was of decreases in all soft drink expenditure outcomes and these appeared to be greater in low-income than high-income households for purchasing prevalence (- 30% and - 25% respectively, t-test p = 0.98), per-capita expenditure (- 37% and - 34%, p = 0.20) and food budget share (- 27% and - 7%, p = 0.65), but not income share (- 6% and - 32%, p = 0.71). The large expenditure increases in bottled water appeared to be greater in low-income than high-income households for purchasing prevalence (355 and 172%, p = 0.32) and food budget share (665 and 468%, p = 0.09), but greater in high-income households for per-capita expenditure (121 and 373%, p < 0.01) and income share (83 and 397%, p = 0.50).
conclusionsThe sweetened-beverage tax was associated with reduced soft drink purchasing and increased bottled water expenditure. Low-income households appeared to have slightly greater declines in soft drink expenditure.
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.