Evidence mapPaperPMID 36857083Full record

SynthesisNutrition reviews2023

An umbrella review of the acceptability of fiscal and pricing policies to reduce diet-related noncommunicable disease.

Luke E Barry, Frank Kee, Jayne Woodside, John Cawley, Edel Doherty, Mike Clarke, Grainne E Crealey, Jim Duggan, Ciaran O'Neill

Open access · hybridAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Nutrition reviews, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Luke E BarryCentre for Public Health, Queen's University, Belfast, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7772-4822
Frank KeeCentre for Public Health, Queen's University, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Jayne WoodsideCentre for Public Health, Queen's University, Belfast, United Kingdom.
John CawleyBrooks School of Public Policy, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, USA.
Edel DohertyJohn E. Cairnes School of Business and Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway, County Galway, Ireland.
Mike ClarkeCentre for Public Health, Queen's University, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Grainne E CrealeyJohn E. Cairnes School of Business and Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway, County Galway, Ireland.
Jim DugganJohn E. Cairnes School of Business and Economics, National University of Ireland, Galway, County Galway, Ireland.
Ciaran O'NeillCentre for Public Health, Queen's University, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Queen's University Belfast · GBOllscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway · IECornell University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

contextPoor diet has been implicated in a range of noncommunicable diseases. Fiscal and pricing policies (FPs) may offer a means by which consumption of food and non-alcoholic beverages with links to such diseases can be influenced to improve public health.

objectiveTo examine the acceptability of FPs to reduce diet-related noncommunicable disease, based on systematic review evidence. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsychInfo, SCI, SSCI, Web of Science, Scopus, EconLit, the Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, and the Campbell Collaboration Library were searched for relevant studies published between January 1, 1990 and June 2021. DATA EXTRACTION: The studies included systematic reviews of diet-related FPs and: used real-world evidence; examined real or perceived barriers/facilitators; targeted the price of food or non-alcoholic beverages; and applied to entire populations within a jurisdiction. A total of 9996 unique relevant records were identified, which were augmented by a search of bibliographies and recommendations from an external expert advisory panel. Following screening, 4 systematic reviews remained. DATA ANALYSIS: Quality appraisal was conducted using the AMSTAR 2 tool. A narrative synthesis was undertaken, with outcomes grouped according to the WHO-INTEGRATE criteria. The findings indicated a paucity of high-quality systematic review evidence and limited public support for the use of FPs to change dietary habits. This lack of support was related to a number of factors that included: their perceived potential to be regressive; a lack of transparency, ie, there was mistrust around the use of revenues raised; a paucity of evidence around health benefits; the deliberate choice of rates that were lower than those considered necessary to affect diet; and concerns about the potential of such FPs to harm economic outcomes such as employment.

conclusionThe findings underscore the need for high-quality systematic review evidence on this topic, and the importance of responding to public concerns and putting in place mechanisms to address these when implementing FPs. This study was funded by Safefood [02A-2020]. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD42021274454.

Indexed as

Noncommunicable DiseasesBeveragesCosts and Cost AnalysisDietFoodHumansSystematic Reviews as Topicacceptabilitybarrierdietfacilitatorfiscalumbrella

Identifiers

PMID36857083
PMCPMC10494142
OpenAlexW4322718522

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.