ArticleHealth promotion international2026
Are commercial determinants of health addressed in Australian health policies?
Article in Health promotion international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The commercial determinants of health (CDoH) are increasingly recognized as major drivers of non-communicable disease and health inequities. However, the extent to which CDoH concepts are translated into policy action remains unclear. This study examined the extent to which Australian public health and health promotion policies recognize and respond to the CDoH. We conducted a critical qualitative content analysis of 94 Australian Commonwealth, state and territory public health and health promotion policy documents published between 2015 and 2025. Using a theory-informed a priori coding framework, we examined explicit recognition of CDoH and the nature of proposed policy responses. Eighteen policies explicitly referred to the CDoH or related concepts, all published from 2021 onwards, indicating recent but uneven policy uptake. Legislative and regulatory measures were concentrated in a small number of Commonwealth-led strategies and focused primarily on tobacco, with more limited attention to unhealthy food and alcohol. State and territory strategies relied more heavily on public awareness campaigns and administrative tools rather than direct regulation of the commercial sector. Governance protections against industry interference were largely confined to tobacco control, with no measures targeting the gambling and fossil fuels industries. Australian public health and health promotion policies demonstrate emerging but uneven recognition of the CDoH, with limited institutionalization through regulatory and governance measures. These findings highlight ongoing challenges in translating health promotion and CDoH frameworks into coherent, whole-of-government policy responses to address the commercial drivers of health and health inequity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.