ArticleDrug and alcohol review2025
The language of alcohol: Similarities and differences in how drinkers and policymakers frame alcohol consumption.
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.
- The language of alcohol: Similarities and differences in how drinkers and policymakers frame alcohol consumption.Drug and alcohol review · 2025Article
- Ethnocentric perceptions, impacts and influences of problematic alcohol use in a global community sample: a mixed-methods study.BMJ public health · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe primary objective of the paper was to compare semantic domains reported by drinkers and policymakers in their alcohol consumption narratives. The research question was 'How do drinkers and policymakers use semantic domains to construct alcohol consumption narratives?'.
designSecondary analysis of open-ended survey responses (The Drinker Corpus: TDC) and three English alcohol policies (The Policy Corpus: TPC).
methodsWmatrix software was used to identify semantic domains that appeared more frequently in our corpora compared to general usage. Wmatrix outputs a log-likelihood (LL) score; a score of 6.63 corresponds to a p value of 0.05, indicating frequently used domains.
resultsFive domains appeared more frequently in both corpora than general usage: 'Cause & Effect/Connection'; 'Disease'; 'Drinks and Alcohol'; 'Excessive drinking'; 'Knowledge' (LL >226.68 for all). Domains were represented differently in the two corpora; the TPC focused on long-term health consequences, like liver disease, whereas the TDC talked about short-term consequences like hangovers. The 'Emotional actions' domain appeared in the TDC more than expected (LL = 231.26). Drinkers reported experiencing positive and negative emotions following drinking. The 'Social actions/states/processes' domain was used more frequently in the TPC than expected (LL = 408.17). Policymakers talked about changing 'behaviour' in partnership with organisations rather than working with drinkers. DISCUSSION AND
conclusionsThis study shows that while drinker and policymaker alcohol consumption narratives draw on the same semantic domains, how these domains are used to construct these narratives differs. To improve the effectiveness of policy initiatives, we recommend greater dialogue between policymakers and drinkers.
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.