Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38843248›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

The impact of the UK soft drink industry levy on the soft drink marketplace, 2017-2020: An interrupted time series analysis with comparator series.

Madison Luick, Lauren K Bandy, Richard Harrington, Jayalakshmi Vijayan, Jean Adams, Steven Cummins, Mike Rayner, Nina Rogers, Harry Rutter, Richard Smith and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

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

12 authors.

Madison LuickUniversity of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Lauren K BandyUniversity of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-5551-8390
Richard HarringtonUniversity of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Jayalakshmi VijayanUniversity of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Jean AdamsMRC Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Steven CumminsPopulation Health Innovation Lab, Department of Public Health, Environments & Society, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3957-4357
Mike RaynerUniversity of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Population Health, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Nina RogersMRC Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1857-2122
Harry RutterDepartment of Social and Policy Sciences, University of Bath, Bath, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9322-0656
Richard SmithVice Chancellor's Office, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom.
Martin WhiteMRC Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Metabolic Science, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, United Kingdom.
Peter ScarboroughUniversity of Oxford, Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, United Kingdom.

Funding

Medical Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn April 2018, the UK government implemented a levy on soft drinks importers and manufacturers, tiered according to the amount of sugar in drinks. The stated aim was to encourage manufacturers to reduce sugar and portion sizes. Previous evidence suggests that the policy has been successful in reducing sugar in drinks in the short-term since implementation, but their sustained effects have not been explored. This study aimed to assess the impact of the soft drink industry levy (SDIL) on sugar levels, price, portion size and use of non-sugar sweeteners in the medium-term. METHODS AND

findingsProduct data from 30 November 2017 to 14 March 2020 from one major UK retail supermarket were analysed (112,452 observations, 126 weekly time points). We used interrupted time series analysis, to assess the impact of the soft-drink industry levy (SDIL) on levy-eligible soft drinks, with exempt drinks (i.e. 100% fruit juices, milks, flavoured milks) acting as a comparator series. At the point of implementation of the SDIL (April 2018) there was a step change in the proportion of eligible drinks with sugar content below the SDIL levy threshold (5g per 100ml) (+0.08, 95%CI: +0.04, +0.12), with a similar sized decrease in the proportion in the highest levy category (> = 8g sugar per 100ml) (-0.06, 95%CI: -0.10, -0.03). Between April 2018 and March 2020, the proportion of eligible drinks below the SDIL levy threshold continued to gradually increase (p = 0.003), while those in the highest levy category decreased (p = 0.007). There was a step change in price of eligible drinks in the higher levy category at the point of implementation of +£0.049 (95%CI: +£0.034, +£0.065) per 100mL (for comparison, the levy is set at £0.024 per 100mL for this group). Trends in price for the high levy category were not altered by the SDIL. In the no levy category, there was a step change in price at the implementation (+£0.012 per 100mL, 95%CI: +£0.008, +£0.023), followed by a second step change in October 2018 (-£0.018p per 100mL, 95%CI: -£0.033, -£0.001p). The volume of products in the higher levy group decreased at the time of the implementation (-305mL on average including multipacks, 95%CI: -511, -99). The change in trend for the product volume of drinks in the higher levy group between April 2018 and March 2020 was in the increasing direction (+704mL per year, 95%CI: -95, 1504), but it did not meet our threshold for statistical significance (p = 0.084). There were no changes observed in the volume of lower levy drinks or no levy drinks. There was a step change in the proportion of drinks with non-sugar sweeteners at the implementation of the SDIL (+0.04, 95%CI: +0.02, +0.06).

conclusionThese results suggest that the SDIL was successful in [1] producing reductions in sugar levels that were maintained over the medium term up to March 2020 and [2] a reduction in product volume for higher tier drinks that may be diminishing over time. Our results also show that the SDIL was associated with a maintained price differential between high and low sugar drinks.

Indexed as

Carbonated BeveragesInterrupted Time Series AnalysisCommerceFood IndustryHumansUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID38843248
PMCPMC11156274

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.