MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226354946 · doi:10.1016/j.lanepe.2022.100325

Impact of introducing a minimum alcohol tax share in retail prices on alcohol-attributable mortality in the WHO European Region: A modelling study

2022· article· en· W4226354946 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Maria Neufeld, Pol Rovira, Carina Ferreira‐Borges, Carolin Kilian, Franco Sassi, Aurelijus Veryga, Jürgen Rehm

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lancet Regional Health - Europe · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institutes of HealthCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchEuropean CommissionNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismWorld Health Organization
KeywordsExciseUnit of alcoholWineConsumption (sociology)EconomicsAlcoholPurchasingAlcohol consumptionPurchasing powerAgricultural economicsBusinessDemographic economicsPublic economicsFood scienceMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Alcohol use and its burden constitute one of the largest public health challenges in the WHO European Region. Raising alcohol taxes is a cost-effective "best buy" measure to reduce alcohol consumption, but its implementation remains uneven. This paper provides an overview of existing tax structures in 50 countries and subregions of the Region, estimates their proportions of tax on retail prices of beer, wine, and spirits, and quantifies the number of deaths that could be averted annually if these tax shares were raised to a minimum level. Methods: Review of databases and statistical reports on taxes and mean retail prices of alcohol beverages in the Region. Affordability was calculated based on alcohol prices, adjusted for differences in purchasing power. Consumption changes and averted mortality were modelled assuming two scenarios. In Scenario 1, a minimum excise tax share level of 25% of the beverage-specific retail price was assumed for all countries. In Scenario 2, in addition to a minimum excise tax share level of 15% it was assumed that per unit of ethanol minimal retail prices were the same irrespective of alcoholic beverages (equalisation). Sensitivity analyses were conducted for different price elasticities. Findings: Alcohol is very affordable in the Region and alcohol taxes have clearly been under-utilized as a public health measure, constituting on average only 5·7%, 14·0% and 31·3% of the retail prices of wine, beer, and spirits, respectively. Tax shares were higher in the eastern part of the Region compared to the EU, where various countries did not have excise taxes on wine. Annually, the introduction of a minimum tax share of 25% (Scenario 1) could avert 40,033 (95% CI: 38,054-46,097) deaths in the WHO European Region (with 753,454,300 inhabitants older than 15 years of age). If a 15% tax share with equalisation were implemented (Scenario 2), 132,906 (95% CI: (124,691-151,674) deaths could be averted. All sensitivity analyses with different elasticities yielded outcomes close to those of the main analyses. Interpretation: Similar to tobacco taxes, increasing alcohol taxes should be considered to be a health-based measure aimed at saving lives. Many countries have hesitated to apply higher taxes to alcohol, but the present results show a clear health benefit as a result of implementing a minimum tax share. Funding: This work was supported by the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (1R01AA028224) and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Institute of Neurosciences, and Mental Health and Addiction (SMN-13950).

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.238
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations41
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Lancet Regional Health - EuropeSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207