ArticleHealth economics2023
Modeled health economic and equity impact on dental caries and health outcomes from a 20% sugar sweetened beverages tax in Australia.
Article in Health economics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Impact of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax on dental caries, periodontitis and edentulism in Australia: a modelling study.BMJ public health · 2026Article
- Discounting Practices in Cost-Effectiveness Analyses in Dentistry: A Systematic Review of Studies Published After 2020.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2026Review
- Economic evaluation on dental caries preventive interventions for Australian children using a priority-setting approach.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2025Article
- Handling uncertainty in cost-effectiveness analysis in dental medicine: a systematic review with a focus on affordability and risk-aversion.Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E · 2025Review
- Trajectories of Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Intake in Early Life: Evidence from a Birth Cohort Study.Nutrients · 2024Article
- Modeled health economic and equity impact on dental caries and health outcomes from a 20% sugar sweetened beverages tax in Australia.Health economics · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Dental caries is the most prevalent oral disease across the life course. This study modeled the population health and economic impact of a 20% sugar sweetened beverages tax (SSB) for preventing dental caries compared to no intervention (societal and healthcare perspective). A cost-effectiveness analysis according to quintiles of area-level socioeconomic disadvantage was performed for the 2020 Australian population (0-100 years old) using a closed cohort Markov model. A qualitative assessment of implementation considerations (e.g., acceptability, equity, sustainability) was undertaken. Health outcomes were modeled as decayed teeth prevented and disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted. The 10-year and lifetime scenarios were modeled with probabilistic sensitivity analysis (Monte Carlo simulation, 2000 cycles). The 10-year scenario from a societal perspective yielded cost-savings of AUD$63.5M, healthcare cost-savings of AUD$42.2M, 510,977 decayed teeth averted and 98.1 DALYs averted. The lifetime scenario resulted in societal cost savings of AUD$176.6M, healthcare cost-savings of AUD$122.5M, 1,309,211 decayed teeth averted and 254.9 DALYs averted. Modeling indicated 71.5% and 74.5% cost-effectiveness for the 10-year and lifetime scenarios, respectively. A three-fold health benefit for the least advantaged was found compared to the most advantaged. A 20% SSB tax in Australia is cost-effective and promotes health equity.
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.