MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044797362 · doi:10.1111/1753-6405.12994

Do alcohol price control measures adequately consider the health of very remote Australians?: Minimum Unit Price in the Northern Territory

2020· article· en· W3044797362 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sarah Clifford, James A. Smith, Elizabeth Adamson, Tessa Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnit priceUnit (ring theory)Control (management)Environmental healthPsychologyEconomicsMedicineMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alcohol is one of the leading preventable causes of death and disability worldwide1 and its harmful use is especially problematic within the Northern Territory, Australia. Alcohol-related harms may be categorised as either lifetime harms, which can include chronic liver disease, diabetes, heart attack and cancer; or single occasion harms, which can include assault, suicide and self-inflicted injuries, and road traffic injuries.2 Both lifetime and single occasion harms are disproportionately noted among those living in very remote locations; according to the Australian Statistical Geography Standard (ASGS) Remoteness Structure, Darwin is outer regional, Katherine and Alice Springs are remote, and the rest of the Northern Territory is very remote. Of those living in both outer regional and very remote Northern Territory locations, 29% drink at levels that place them at risk of lifetime harm, and 43% of individuals living in very remote Northern Territory drink at levels that place them at significant risk of harm on a single occasion at least monthly.3 As a comparison, in the major cities of Victoria, Australian Capital Territory, South Australia and New South Wales, only 14–15% of people drink at levels that put them at risk of lifetime harm, and 22.5–24% drink at levels that place them at risk of harm on a single occasion.3 Recent estimates indicate that harm caused by alcohol-related incidents costs the Northern Territory approximately $1.38 billion a year.4 One of the most effective policy responses is price control, with strong evidence to suggest consumption decreases as price increases.5 There are two major forms of alcohol excise taxes: ad valorem, which is a percentage of the price prior to sale tax; and specific tax, which is a predefined sum per unit of alcohol (also called volumetric tax).6 Minimum Unit Price (MUP) is another economic measure, which involves setting a minimum price at which alcohol can be sold. Evidence from Canada and the UK suggests that an MUP is likely to reduce consumption and related morbidity and mortality7 as a complementary strategy to taxation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.179
Threshold uncertainty score0.355

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.293
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.107 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian and New Zealand Journal of Public HealthSame topicAlcohol Consumption and Health EffectsFrench-language works237,207