Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34566546›Full record

ArticleAddiction research & theory2021

Reconceptualising the study of alcohol policy decision-making: the contribution of political science.

Matthew Lesch, Jim McCambridge

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. 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

2 authors.

Matthew LeschDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3015-0937
Jim McCambridgeDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5461-7001

Funding

Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this article, we demonstrate the applicability of a 3-I (interests, institutions, and ideas) framework to alcohol policy research. The analysis uses literature from political science research to provide a core theoretical framework. To help illustrate the argument, we draw on relevant examples from alcohol policy in the UK as well as initial findings from an ongoing research study on minimum-unit pricing in Wales. The Welsh case study provides an opportunity to examine the value of the framework in generating testable hypotheses in alcohol policy research. We find that several interrelated factors promoted policy change in Wales, including the government's power to legislate on matters of public health (institutionally), a relatively weak alcohol industry (a key interest group), and a public health community with specific policy arguments on why and how to tackle alcohol-related harms (ideas). Our analysis has important implications for public health research and evidence-based policymaking. It suggests that the uptake of new ideas depends on the existing configuration of interests, institutions and ideas. This analysis provides alcohol policy researchers with a portable framework for analysing the policy context.

Indexed as

Alcohol policydecision-makingminimum-unit pricingpolitical scienceWales

Identifiers

PMID34566546
PMCPMC8460360

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.