ArticleDrug and alcohol review2025
Comparing alcohol policy environments in high-income jurisdictions with the International Alcohol Control Policy Index.
Article in Drug and alcohol review, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Provincial and territorial results and recommendations from the Canadian Alcohol Policy Evaluation project: Room for improvement.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026Article
- Comparing alcohol policy environments in high-income jurisdictions with the International Alcohol Control Policy Index.Drug and alcohol review · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionConsiderable evidence exists on the most effective policy to reduce alcohol harm; however, a tool and index to allow comparisons of policy status of the most effective policies between similar jurisdictions and change over time within a jurisdiction has not been widely used. The International Alcohol Control (IAC) Policy Index is designed to address this gap and monitor the alcohol policy environment with regard to four effective policy domains (tax/pricing, availability, marketing and drink driving).
methodsThis study compares IAC Policy Index scores across 11 high-income jurisdictions: Aotearoa (Māori language name for New Zealand); Australia; Finland; Norway; the Netherlands; (Republic of Ireland; Lithuania; Ontario; Alberta; Quebec; British Columbia). Collaborators in the 11 high-income jurisdictions populated the online Alcohol Policy Tool with available indicators. The team in Aotearoa New Zealand sought to validate information and worked with collaborators to clarify any uncertainties in the data.
resultsLithuania, Norway, Finland and Ireland scored above average on the IAC Policy Index. The jurisdictions varied in terms of the strength of policy in different domains, with drink driving legislation showing the greatest consistency and marketing the strongest relationship between stringency of policy and impact on the ground. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsResults in high-income jurisdictions suggested the IAC Policy Index provides a useful overview of core alcohol policy status, allows for comparisons between jurisdictions and has the potential to be useful in alcohol policy debate.
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.