Efficacy and the strength of evidence of U.S. alcohol control policies

Toben F. Nelson, Ziming Xuan, Thomas F. Babor, Robert D. Brewer, Frank J. Chaloupka, Paul J. Gruenewald, Harold Holder, Michael Klitzner, James F. Mosher, Rebecca L. Ramirez, Robert Reynolds, Traci L. Toomey, Victoria Churchill, Timothy S. Naimi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

59 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background Public policy can limit alcohol consumption and its associated harm, but no direct comparison of the relative efficacy of alcohol control policies exists for the U.S. Purpose To identify alcohol control policies and develop quantitative ratings of their efficacy and strength of evidence. Methods In 2010, a Delphi panel of ten U.S. alcohol policy experts identified and rated the efficacy of alcohol control policies for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving among both the general population and youth, and the strength of evidence informing the efficacy of each policy. The policies were nominated on the basis of scientific evidence and potential for public health impact. Analysis was conducted in 2010-2012. Results Panelists identified and rated 47 policies. Policies limiting price received the highest ratings, with alcohol taxes receiving the highest ratings for all four outcomes. Highly rated policies for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving in the general population also were rated highly among youth, although several policies were rated more highly for youth compared with the general population. Policy efficacy ratings for the general population and youth were positively correlated for reducing both binge drinking (r=0.50) and alcohol-impaired driving (r=0.45). The correlation between efficacy ratings for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving was strong for the general population (r=0.88) and for youth (r=0.85). Efficacy ratings were positively correlated with strength-of-evidence ratings. Conclusions Comparative policy ratings can help characterize the alcohol policy environment, inform policy discussions, and identify future research needs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)19-28
Number of pages10
JournalAmerican journal of preventive medicine
Volume45
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2013

Fingerprint

Alcohols
Binge Drinking
Population
Taxes
Public Policy
Alcohol Drinking
Public Health

Cite this

Nelson, T. F., Xuan, Z., Babor, T. F., Brewer, R. D., Chaloupka, F. J., Gruenewald, P. J., ... Naimi, T. S. (2013). Efficacy and the strength of evidence of U.S. alcohol control policies. American journal of preventive medicine, 45(1), 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.03.008

Efficacy and the strength of evidence of U.S. alcohol control policies. / Nelson, Toben F.; Xuan, Ziming; Babor, Thomas F.; Brewer, Robert D.; Chaloupka, Frank J.; Gruenewald, Paul J.; Holder, Harold; Klitzner, Michael; Mosher, James F.; Ramirez, Rebecca L.; Reynolds, Robert; Toomey, Traci L.; Churchill, Victoria; Naimi, Timothy S.

In: American journal of preventive medicine, Vol. 45, No. 1, 01.07.2013, p. 19-28.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Nelson, TF, Xuan, Z, Babor, TF, Brewer, RD, Chaloupka, FJ, Gruenewald, PJ, Holder, H, Klitzner, M, Mosher, JF, Ramirez, RL, Reynolds, R, Toomey, TL, Churchill, V & Naimi, TS 2013, 'Efficacy and the strength of evidence of U.S. alcohol control policies', American journal of preventive medicine, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 19-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.03.008
Nelson, Toben F. ; Xuan, Ziming ; Babor, Thomas F. ; Brewer, Robert D. ; Chaloupka, Frank J. ; Gruenewald, Paul J. ; Holder, Harold ; Klitzner, Michael ; Mosher, James F. ; Ramirez, Rebecca L. ; Reynolds, Robert ; Toomey, Traci L. ; Churchill, Victoria ; Naimi, Timothy S. / Efficacy and the strength of evidence of U.S. alcohol control policies. In: American journal of preventive medicine. 2013 ; Vol. 45, No. 1. pp. 19-28.
@article{a269167129e84f77a15111d7bb433571,
title = "Efficacy and the strength of evidence of U.S. alcohol control policies",
abstract = "Background Public policy can limit alcohol consumption and its associated harm, but no direct comparison of the relative efficacy of alcohol control policies exists for the U.S. Purpose To identify alcohol control policies and develop quantitative ratings of their efficacy and strength of evidence. Methods In 2010, a Delphi panel of ten U.S. alcohol policy experts identified and rated the efficacy of alcohol control policies for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving among both the general population and youth, and the strength of evidence informing the efficacy of each policy. The policies were nominated on the basis of scientific evidence and potential for public health impact. Analysis was conducted in 2010-2012. Results Panelists identified and rated 47 policies. Policies limiting price received the highest ratings, with alcohol taxes receiving the highest ratings for all four outcomes. Highly rated policies for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving in the general population also were rated highly among youth, although several policies were rated more highly for youth compared with the general population. Policy efficacy ratings for the general population and youth were positively correlated for reducing both binge drinking (r=0.50) and alcohol-impaired driving (r=0.45). The correlation between efficacy ratings for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving was strong for the general population (r=0.88) and for youth (r=0.85). Efficacy ratings were positively correlated with strength-of-evidence ratings. Conclusions Comparative policy ratings can help characterize the alcohol policy environment, inform policy discussions, and identify future research needs.",
author = "Nelson, {Toben F.} and Ziming Xuan and Babor, {Thomas F.} and Brewer, {Robert D.} and Chaloupka, {Frank J.} and Gruenewald, {Paul J.} and Harold Holder and Michael Klitzner and Mosher, {James F.} and Ramirez, {Rebecca L.} and Robert Reynolds and Toomey, {Traci L.} and Victoria Churchill and Naimi, {Timothy S.}",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.amepre.2013.03.008",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "45",
pages = "19--28",
journal = "American Journal of Preventive Medicine",
issn = "0749-3797",
publisher = "Elsevier Inc.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Efficacy and the strength of evidence of U.S. alcohol control policies

AU - Nelson, Toben F.

AU - Xuan, Ziming

AU - Babor, Thomas F.

AU - Brewer, Robert D.

AU - Chaloupka, Frank J.

AU - Gruenewald, Paul J.

AU - Holder, Harold

AU - Klitzner, Michael

AU - Mosher, James F.

AU - Ramirez, Rebecca L.

AU - Reynolds, Robert

AU - Toomey, Traci L.

AU - Churchill, Victoria

AU - Naimi, Timothy S.

PY - 2013/7/1

Y1 - 2013/7/1

N2 - Background Public policy can limit alcohol consumption and its associated harm, but no direct comparison of the relative efficacy of alcohol control policies exists for the U.S. Purpose To identify alcohol control policies and develop quantitative ratings of their efficacy and strength of evidence. Methods In 2010, a Delphi panel of ten U.S. alcohol policy experts identified and rated the efficacy of alcohol control policies for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving among both the general population and youth, and the strength of evidence informing the efficacy of each policy. The policies were nominated on the basis of scientific evidence and potential for public health impact. Analysis was conducted in 2010-2012. Results Panelists identified and rated 47 policies. Policies limiting price received the highest ratings, with alcohol taxes receiving the highest ratings for all four outcomes. Highly rated policies for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving in the general population also were rated highly among youth, although several policies were rated more highly for youth compared with the general population. Policy efficacy ratings for the general population and youth were positively correlated for reducing both binge drinking (r=0.50) and alcohol-impaired driving (r=0.45). The correlation between efficacy ratings for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving was strong for the general population (r=0.88) and for youth (r=0.85). Efficacy ratings were positively correlated with strength-of-evidence ratings. Conclusions Comparative policy ratings can help characterize the alcohol policy environment, inform policy discussions, and identify future research needs.

AB - Background Public policy can limit alcohol consumption and its associated harm, but no direct comparison of the relative efficacy of alcohol control policies exists for the U.S. Purpose To identify alcohol control policies and develop quantitative ratings of their efficacy and strength of evidence. Methods In 2010, a Delphi panel of ten U.S. alcohol policy experts identified and rated the efficacy of alcohol control policies for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving among both the general population and youth, and the strength of evidence informing the efficacy of each policy. The policies were nominated on the basis of scientific evidence and potential for public health impact. Analysis was conducted in 2010-2012. Results Panelists identified and rated 47 policies. Policies limiting price received the highest ratings, with alcohol taxes receiving the highest ratings for all four outcomes. Highly rated policies for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving in the general population also were rated highly among youth, although several policies were rated more highly for youth compared with the general population. Policy efficacy ratings for the general population and youth were positively correlated for reducing both binge drinking (r=0.50) and alcohol-impaired driving (r=0.45). The correlation between efficacy ratings for reducing binge drinking and alcohol-impaired driving was strong for the general population (r=0.88) and for youth (r=0.85). Efficacy ratings were positively correlated with strength-of-evidence ratings. Conclusions Comparative policy ratings can help characterize the alcohol policy environment, inform policy discussions, and identify future research needs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879334778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879334778&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.03.008

DO - 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.03.008

M3 - Article

VL - 45

SP - 19

EP - 28

JO - American Journal of Preventive Medicine

JF - American Journal of Preventive Medicine

SN - 0749-3797

IS - 1

ER -