Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35974346›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2022

The 'sugar tax' in Bermuda: a mixed methods study of general population and key stakeholder perceptions.

Kelsey K Case, Elisa Pineda, Jack Olney, Alexa Blair Segal, Franco Sassi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Kelsey K Case *School of Public Health, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK. k.case@imperial.ac.uk.
Elisa Pineda *School of Public Health, Imperial College London, Norfolk Place, London, W2 1PG, UK.
Jack OlneyCentre for Health Economics & Policy Innovation, Imperial College Business School, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Alexa Blair SegalCentre for Health Economics & Policy Innovation, Imperial College Business School, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Franco SassiCentre for Health Economics & Policy Innovation, Imperial College Business School, Imperial College London, London, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTaxes on discretionary foods and sugar-sweetened beverages have emerged as a strategy for health promotion. Between 2018-2019, the Bermuda government introduced a phased tax on imported sugar-sweetened beverages, confectionery, products containing cocoa and pure sugar, and eliminated import duties on select healthy food items. The aim of this study was to conduct an mixed methods evaluation of perceptions of the tax among the general population and key stakeholders.

methodsWe conducted a survey of the general population (N = 400), and semi-structured interviews with key informants (N = 14) from the government, food and beverage, and health sectors to understand awareness, acceptability, and perceived impact of the tax after implementation. Survey data was analysed using thematic analysis, summary statistics, and Chi-squared tests. Key informant interviews were analysed using the framework method.

resultsGeneral population respondents had high awareness of the sugar tax (94%) but low awareness of the healthy food subsidy (32%). Most respondents (67%) felt the tax was not an appropriate way to motivate healthier consumption due to beliefs the tax would not be effective (44%), and because of the high price of healthy food (20%). However, nearly half (48%) reported consuming fewer taxed products, primarily for health reasons but also motivated by price increases. Key informants indicated there was high awareness but limited understanding of the tax policy. Informants expressed support for taxation as a health promotion strategy, conditional on policy implementation. The lack of clear price differentiation between taxed and un-taxed products and the absence of accompanying health education were key factors believed to affect the impact of the tax. No informants were aware of use of tax revenues for health purposes and tax revenue was reportedly re-directed to other priorities after implementation.

conclusionsThere was high awareness, but limited acceptability of the Bermuda sugar tax as implemented. Clarity in the tax policy, appropriateness of the tax mechanism, and use of revenue in alignment with the tax aim are critical components for acceptance. The absence of complementary education and health promotion affected acceptance and may limit potential health impacts. The lessons learned in Bermuda can inform similar policies in other settings.

Indexed as

SugarsSugar-Sweetened BeveragesBermudaBeveragesCommerceHumansTaxesSugarsBermudaDiscretionary foods taxHealth taxMixed-methods analysisSugar tax

Identifiers

PMID35974346
PMCPMC9379233

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.