Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35579322›Full record

ArticleThe Milbank quarterly2022

Using Regulatory Stances to See All the Commercial Determinants of Health.

Alex C Liber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Milbank quarterly, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. E-CIGARETTE FLAVOR RESTRICTIONS' EFFECTS ON TOBACCO PRODUCT SALES.American journal of health economics · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. A Decision-Theoretic Public Health Framework for Heated Tobacco and Nicotine Vaping Products.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    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

1 author.

Alex C LiberGeorgetown University Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Policy Points The commercial determinants of health (CDoH) concept, which currently focuses on markets that harm health, should be expanded to refer to the interface between commerce and health, which can sometimes have positive public health consequences. The regulatory stances framework helps us classify public health preferences for regulating specific markets related to CDoH, based on the intended effects of regulations on market size. The regulatory stances a jurisdiction can adopt can be classified as ranging from prohibitionist through contractionist, permissive, and expansionist, to universalist. The regulatory stances framework increases the usefulness of the CDoH concept by expanding the conversation beyond negative determinants of health and providing a fuller view of the tools at the disposal of society to alter markets and improve health. CONTEXT: The effects of commerce on the public health are omnipresent. The commercial determinants of health (CDoH) represent a burgeoning area of scholarly debate and activist policymaking to redress markets that adversely affect public health. The CDoH debate is a logical extension of the tobacco control movement, but, to its detriment, the CDoH conversation remains primarily focused policies and proposals that are analogous to historical tobacco control strategies.

methodsThis paper argues that for the CDoH to develop further and broaden its appeal, it should expand to cover markets with conditional and positive impacts on health. To explain and order this conversation, a comparative framework for regulatory policy is introduced: the regulatory stances. The regulatory stances classify a regulatory policy based on the intended effect of policy on the size of a market in the future relative to the present.

findingsSome markets that interface between commerce and health do not inherently harm health. Regulatory policy toward these markets should be different in intent than regulatory policy for markets with negative health effects.

conclusionsBy using the regulatory stances framework to encompass markets that have positive or conditional effects on health as well as those that have adverse health effects, the CDoH conversation can shift away from the exclusive focus on strategies to shrink markets with adverse health impacts to consider a wider array of policy options.

Indexed as

CommerceTobacco ProductsPublic Healthcommercial determinants of healthcomparative regulationpublic policytobacco

Identifiers

PMID35579322
PMCPMC9576230

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
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 Socratic graph.