Alcohol policy changes during the first three-months of the COVID-19 pandemic: Development and application of a classification scheme
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Policy changes in response to the COVID-19 pandemic have impacted on alcohol control. This study describes the development and application of a classification scheme to map alcohol policy changes during the first three-months of the COVID-19 pandemic in five countries and/or subnational jurisdictions. METHOD: A pre-registered systematic review of policy decisions from March to May 2020, in Australia/New South Wales, Canada/Ontario, Chile, Italy and the United Kingdom. One author extracted the data for each jurisdiction using a country-specific search strategy of government documents. We coded policy changes using an adapted WHO classification scheme, whether the policy was expected to tighten or loosen alcohol control, have mainly immediate or delayed impact on consumption and harm and impact the general population versus specific populations. We present descriptive statistics of policy change. RESULTS: We developed a classification scheme with four levels. Existing policy options were insufficient to capture policy changes in alcohol availability, thus we added seventeen new sub-categories. We found 114 alcohol control policies introduced across the five jurisdictions, covering five (out of ten) WHO action areas. The majority aimed to change alcohol availability, by regulating the operation of alcohol outlets. All countries introduced closures to on-premise alcohol outlets and, except Chile, allowed off-sales via take away or home delivery. We also observed several pricing policies introducing subsidies to support the alcohol industry. Seventy-four percent of policy changes were expected to tighten alcohol control and 12.3 % to weaken control. Weakening policy changes were mostly related to retail mode switching or expansion (allowing take away or home delivery). CONCLUSION: Alcohol control policies during the first three months of the COVID-19 pandemic were targeted primarily at alcohol availability and about one tenth might weaken alcohol control. Temporary changes to alcohol retail during the COVID-19 pandemic, if made permanent, could significantly expand alcohol availability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.048 | 0.131 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.025 | 0.026 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".