ArticleAddiction research & theory2021
Looking Back and Moving Forward: The Evolution and Potential Opportunities for the Future of Alcohol Outlet Density Measurement.
Article in Addiction research & theory, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Correlation Among Neighborhood-Level Measures of the Tobacco Retail Environment.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
- Is alcohol outlet availability associated with binge drinking in Canadian young adults? Findings from British Columbia and Quebec.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2024Article
- Using SaTScan to identify and map nightlife areas in Philadelphia, PA.Journal of maps · 2024Article
- Establishing the Relative Accuracy of Using City Directories as Proxies to Define and Reconstruct Historical Alcohol Environments.Journal of studies on alcohol and drugs · 2023Article
- Mapping the Way to Good Health: The Interdisciplinary Challenges of Geographers in Medical Research.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The literature consistently finds that areas with greater density of alcohol outlets (places that sell alcohol) tend to have higher levels of public health harms. However, conflicting findings arise when researchers drill down to identify the type(s) of alcohol outlets with the strongest associations with harms and the mechanisms that explain these associations. These disagreements could be a result of the outdated methods commonly used to quantify the alcohol environment: counts of the number of outlets in an area. This manuscript reviews the events and ideas that shaped the literature on the physical alcohol environment. It then defines the three main methods used to measure alcohol outlet density, conducts an exploratory factor analysis to explore the constructs underlying each method, and presents a novel conceptual framework that summarizes the three methods, their respective underlying constructs, and the setting(s) in which each may be most appropriate. The framework proposes that counts of alcohol outlets measure availability, proximity to the nearest outlet measures accessibility, and spatial access measures measure access, which comprises both availability and accessibility. We argue that researchers should consider using proximity and spatial access measures when possible and outline how doing so may present opportunities to advance theory and the design and implementation of alcohol outlet zoning regulations. Finally, this manuscript draws on research from other areas of the built environment to suggest opportunities to use novel methods to overcome common hurdles (e.g., separating subtypes of outlets, ecologic designs) and a new challenge on the horizon: home delivery.
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.