Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38263748›Full record

ArticlePublic health nutrition2024

Parliamentary reaction to the announcement and implementation of the UK Soft Drinks Industry Levy: applied thematic analysis of 2016-2020 parliamentary debates.

Catrin P Jones, Emma R Lawlor, Hannah Forde, Dolly Rz van Tulleken, Steven Cummins, Jean Adams, Richard Smith, Mike Rayner, Harry Rutter, Tarra L Penney and 3 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Public health nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

13 authors.

Catrin P JonesMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1425-0513
Emma R LawlorMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Hannah FordeMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Dolly Rz van TullekenMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Steven CumminsPopulation Health Innovation Lab, Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, Faculty of Public Health and Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, UK.
Jean AdamsMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5733-7830
Richard SmithFaculty of Health and Life Sciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, UK.
Mike RaynerNuffield Department of Population Health, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.
Harry RutterDepartment of Social and Policy Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, UK.
Tarra L PenneyGlobal Food System and Policy Research, School of Global Health, Faculty of Health, York University, Toronto, Canada.
Olivia AlliotMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Sofie ArmitageMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.
Martin WhiteMRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, CB2 0QQ, UK.

Funding

Department of Health 16/130/01Department of Health 16/49/01Medical Research Council MC_UU_00006/7Medical Research Council MC_UU_12015/6Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe UK Soft Drinks Industry Levy (SDIL) (announced in March 2016; implemented in April 2018) aims to incentivise reformulation of soft drinks to reduce added sugar levels. The SDIL has been applauded as a policy success, and it has survived calls from parliamentarians for it to be repealed. We aimed to explore parliamentary reaction to the SDIL following its announcement until two years post-implementation in order to understand how health policy can become established and resilient to opposition.

designSearches of Hansard for parliamentary debate transcripts that discussed the SDIL retrieved 186 transcripts, with 160 included after screening. Five stages of Applied Thematic Analysis were conducted: familiarisation and creation of initial codebooks; independent second coding; codebook finalisation through team consensus; final coding of the dataset to the complete codebook; and theme finalisation through team consensus.

settingThe United Kingdom Parliament.

participantsN/A.

resultsBetween the announcement (16/03/2016) - royal assent (26/04/2017), two themes were identified

conclusionsAfter the announcement, the SDIL had cross-party support and was recognised to have encouraged reformulation prior to implementation. Lessons for governments indicate that the combination of cross-party support and a policy's documented success in achieving its aim can help cement the resilience of it to opposition and threats of repeal.

Indexed as

Carbonated BeveragesTaxesHealth PolicyHumansSugarsUnited KingdomSugarsGovernmentHealth policyParliamentPolitical debateSoft Drinks Industry LevySugar tax

Identifiers

PMID38263748
PMCPMC7615650

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.