Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34992078›Full record

ArticleBMJ global health2022

Equity impact of minimum unit pricing of alcohol on household health and finances among rich and poor drinkers in South Africa.

Naomi Gibbs, Colin Angus, Simon Dixon, D H Charles, Petra S Meier, Micheal Kofi Boachie, Stéphane Verguet

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ global health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

7 authors.

Naomi GibbsSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK n.gibbs@sheffield.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-4704-8082
Colin AngusSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Simon DixonSchool of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
D H CharlesAlcohol Tobacco and Other Drug Use Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Cape Town, South Africa.
Petra S MeierMRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.
Micheal Kofi BoachiePriority Cost Effective Lessons for Systems Strengethening, South Africa (PRICELESS SA), School of Public Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Witswatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-1062-889X
Stéphane VerguetDepartment of Global Health and Population, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4128-0849

Funding

Chief Scientist Office SPHSU20Medical Research Council MC_UU_00022/5Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 108903/B/15/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSouth Africa experiences significant levels of alcohol-related harm. Recent research suggests minimum unit pricing (MUP) for alcohol would be an effective policy, but high levels of income inequality raise concerns about equity impacts. This paper quantifies the equity impact of MUP on household health and finances in rich and poor drinkers in South Africa.

methodsWe draw from extended cost-effectiveness analysis (ECEA) methods and an epidemiological policy appraisal model of MUP for South Africa to simulate the equity impact of a ZAR 10 MUP over a 20-year time horizon. We estimate the impact across wealth quintiles on: (i) alcohol consumption and expenditures; (ii) mortality; (iii) government healthcare cost savings; (iv) reductions in cases of catastrophic health expenditures (CHE) and household savings linked to reduced health-related workplace absence.

resultsWe estimate MUP would reduce consumption more among the poorest than the richest drinkers. Expenditure would increase by ZAR 353 000 million (1 US$=13.2 ZAR), the poorest contributing 13% and the richest 28% of the increase, although this remains regressive compared with mean income. Of the 22 600 deaths averted, 56% accrue to the bottom two quintiles; government healthcare cost savings would be substantial (ZAR 3.9 billion). Cases of CHE averted would be 564 700, 46% among the poorest two quintiles. Indirect cost savings amount to ZAR 51.1 billion.

conclusionsA MUP policy in South Africa has the potential to reduce harm and health inequality. Fiscal policies for population health require structured policy appraisal, accounting for the totality of effects using mathematical models in association with ECEA methodology.

Indexed as

Alcoholic BeveragesHealth Status DisparitiesAlcohol DrinkingCost-Benefit AnalysisHumansSouth Africaepidemiologyhealth economicshealth policymathematical modellingpublic health

Identifiers

PMID34992078
PMCPMC8739056

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.