Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34032809›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2021

Taxed and untaxed beverage intake by South African young adults after a national sugar-sweetened beverage tax: A before-and-after study.

Michael Essman, Lindsey Smith Taillie, Tamryn Frank, Shu Wen Ng, Barry M Popkin, Elizabeth C Swart

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
10.6field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Michael EssmanDepartment of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-5017-3880
Lindsey Smith TaillieDepartment of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-4555-2525
Tamryn FrankFaculty of Community and Health Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Bellville, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-5180-9171
Shu Wen NgDepartment of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0003-0582-110X
Barry M PopkinDepartment of Nutrition, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9495-9324
Elizabeth C SwartFaculty of Community and Health Sciences, University of the Western Cape, Bellville, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-7786-3117
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · USUniversity of the Western Cape · ZA

Funding

North Carolina Translational & Clinical Sciences Institute (NC TraCS)UL1TR001111 · NCATS · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI BUSE, JOHN BERNARD, CAREY, TIMOTHY S · 2013 to 2017
$43.9M
Carolina Population CenterR24HD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI MORGAN, SAMUEL PHILIP · 2005 to 2014
$10.0M
Research Services CoreP2CHD050924 · NICHD · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI KAREN B GUZZO · 2015 to 2026
$9.6M
Global Cardiometabolic Disease TrainingT32HL129969 · NHLBI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI ADAIR, LINDA S · 2016 to 2025
$2.1M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001111NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL129969NICHD NIH HHS P2C HD050924NICHD NIH HHS R24 HD050924
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn an effort to prevent and reduce the prevalence rate of people with obesity and diabetes, South Africa implemented a sugar-content-based tax called the Health Promotion Levy in April 2018, one of the first sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) taxes to be based on each gram of sugar (beyond 4 g/100 ml). This before-and-after study estimated changes in taxed and untaxed beverage intake 1 year after the tax, examining separately, to our knowledge for the first time, the role of reformulation distinct from behavioral changes in SSB intake. METHODS AND

findingsWe collected single-day 24-hour dietary recalls from repeat cross-sectional surveys of adults aged 18-39 years in Langa, South Africa. Participants were recruited in February-March 2018 (pre-tax, n = 2,459) and February-March 2019 (post-tax, n = 2,489) using door-to-door sampling. We developed time-specific food composition tables (FCTs) for South African beverages before and after the tax, linked with the diet recalls. By linking pre-tax FCTs only to dietary intake data collected in the pre-tax and post-tax periods, we calculated changes in beverage intake due to behavioral change, assuming no reformulation. Next, we repeated the analysis using an updated FCT in the post-tax period to capture the marginal effect of reformulation. We estimated beverage intake using a 2-part model that takes into consideration the biases in using ordinary least squares or other continuous variable approaches with many individuals with zero intake. First, a probit model was used to estimate the probability of consuming the specific beverage category. Then, conditional on a positive outcome, a generalized linear model with a log-link was used to estimate the continuous amount of beverage consumed. Among taxed beverages, sugar intake decreased significantly (p < 0.0001) from 28.8 g/capita/day (95% CI 27.3-30.4) pre-tax to 19.8 (95% CI 18.5-21.1) post-tax. Energy intake decreased (p < 0.0001) from 121 kcal/capita/day (95% CI 114-127) pre-tax to 82 (95% CI 76-87) post-tax. Volume intake decreased (p < 0.0001) from 315 ml/capita/day (95% CI 297-332) pre-tax to 198 (95% CI 185-211) post-tax. Among untaxed beverages, sugar intake increased (p < 0.0001) by 5.3 g/capita/day (95% CI 3.7 to 6.9), and energy intake increased (p < 0.0001) by 29 kcal/capita/day (95% CI 19 to 39). Among total beverages, sugar intake decreased significantly (p = 0.004) by 3.7 (95% CI -6.2 to -1.2) g/capita/day. Behavioral change accounted for reductions of 24% in energy, 22% in sugar, and 23% in volume, while reformulation accounted for additional reductions of 8% in energy, 9% in sugar, and 14% in volume from taxed beverages. The key limitations of this study are an inability to make causal claims due to repeat cross-sectional data collection, and that the magnitude of reduction in taxed beverage intake may not be generalizable to higher income populations.

conclusionsUsing a large sample of a high-consuming, low-income population, we found large reductions in taxed beverage intake, separating the components of behavioral change from reformulation. This reduction was partially compensated by an increase in sugar and energy from untaxed beverages. Because policies such as taxes can incentivize reformulation, our use of an up-to-date FCT that reflects a rapidly changing food supply is novel and important for evaluating policy effects on intake.

Indexed as

DrinkingEnergy IntakeAdultConsumer BehaviorCross-Sectional StudiesHumansSouth AfricaSugar-Sweetened BeveragesTaxesYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID34032809
PMCPMC8148332
OpenAlexW3165539492

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.