ArticleJournal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine2026
Change in Advertising Exposure of Unhealthy Commodities After the Implementation of an Outdoor Advertising Restrictions Policy in Bristol, UK: A Descriptive Study.
Article in Journal of urban health : bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In 2021, Bristol, UK, implemented a city-wide policy restricting advertising of unhealthy commodities on council-owned sites. We aimed to describe advertising exposure before and after the implementation of the policy in Bristol. We collected data from bus shelters in Bristol (N = 283) and neighboring South Gloucestershire (SG, comparator, N = 65), using in-person and Google Street View audits, before (T0, 02/2022 - 07/2022) and after (T1, 04/2023 - 07/2023 and T2, 11/2023 - 02/2024) policy implementation. We captured unhealthy commodity adverts on display; high in fat, sugar or salt (HFSS) products (defined using the UK Nutrient Profiling Model), alcohol, gambling or payday loans; information on brands; whether they appealed to children or adolescents and split analyses by area deprivation and proximity to schools. At T0, unhealthy commodity advertising in both areas was relatively low, however the policy successfully reduced unhealthy commodity advertising in Bristol at T2 (11.3% to 0.8%), compared to an increase in SG (0.9% to 18.1%). Most restricted adverts in both areas displayed HFSS products (ranging 60-100%), especially fast food, with limited alcohol and gambling and no payday loan advertising observed. A few adverts displaying non-compliant products were maintained in Bristol but advertisers also switched to advertising alternative, compliant products. Minimal unhealthy commodity advertising appealed to children/adolescents (1.1-8.8%) or appeared within 100m of schools (N = 2 adverts), and no clear association with area deprivation was found. Findings suggest the need for formal monitoring processes to ensure policy adherence and assess unhealthy commodity advertising in the entire outdoor space to inform potential expansion of such policies.
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.