Public Health

Economic growth in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC) has raised interest in how disease burden patterns are related to economic development. Meanwhile, poverty-related diseases are considered to be neglected in terms of research and development (R&D). Developing intuitive and meaningful metrics to measure how different diseases are related to poverty and neglected in the current R&D system. We measured how diseases are related to economic development with the income relation factor (IRF), defined by the ratio of disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) per 100,000 inhabitants in LMIC versus that in high-income countries. We calculated the IRF for 291 diseases and injuries and 67 risk factors included in the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. We measured neglect in R&D with the neglect factor (NF), defined by the ratio of disease burden in DALYs (as percentage of the total global disease burden) and R&D expenditure (as percentage of total global health-related R&D expenditure) ...

This is the protocol for a review and there is no abstract. The objectives are as follows:

To assess the effects of environmental interventions (excluding taxation) targeted at sugar-sweetened beverages or low-calorie alternatives to sugar-sweetened beverages on consumption levels, diet-related anthropometric measures and health outcomes, and on any reported unintended consequences or adverse outcomes.

Background

Frequent consumption of excess amounts of sugar‐sweetened beverages (SSB) is a risk factor for obesity, type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and dental caries. Environmental interventions, i.e. interventions that alter the physical or social environment in which individuals make beverage choices, have been advocated as a means to reduce the consumption of SSB.

Objectives

To assess the effects of environmental interventions (excluding taxation) on the consumption of sugar‐sweetened beverages and sugar‐sweetened milk, diet‐related anthropometric measures and health outcomes, and on any reported unintended consequences or adverse outcomes.

Search methods

We searched 11 general, specialist and regional databases from inception to 24 January 2018. We also searched trial registers, reference lists and citations, scanned websites of relevant organisations, and contacted study authors.

Selection criteria

We included studies on interventions implemented at an environmental level, reporting effects on direct or indirect measures of SSB intake, diet‐related anthropometric measures and health outcomes, or any reported adverse outcome. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), non‐randomised controlled trials (NRCTs), controlled before‐after (CBA) and interrupted‐time‐series (ITS) studies, implemented in real‐world settings with a combined length of intervention and follow‐up of at least 12 weeks and at least 20 individuals in each of the intervention and control groups. We excluded studies in which participants were administered SSB as part of clinical trials, and multicomponent interventions which did not report SSB‐specific outcome data. We excluded studies on the taxation of SSB, as these are the subject of a separate Cochrane Review.

Data collection and analysis

Two review authors independently screened studies for inclusion, extracted data and assessed the risks of bias of included studies. We classified interventions according to the NOURISHING framework, and synthesised results narratively and conducted meta‐analyses for two outcomes relating to two intervention types. We assessed our confidence in the certainty of effect estimates with the GRADE framework as very low, low, moderate or high, and presented ‘Summary of findings’ tables.

Main results

We identified 14,488 unique records, and assessed 1030 in full text for eligibility. We found 58 studies meeting our inclusion criteria, including 22 RCTs, 3 NRCTs, 14 CBA studies, and 19 ITS studies, with a total of 1,180,096 participants. The median length of follow‐up was 10 months. The studies included children, teenagers and adults, and were implemented in a variety of settings, including schools, retailing and food service establishments. We judged most studies to be at high or unclear risk of bias in at least one domain, and most studies used non‐randomised designs. The studies examine a broad range of interventions, and we present results for these separately.

Labelling interventions (8 studies): We found moderate‐certainty evidence that traffic‐light labelling is associated with decreasing sales of SSBs, and low‐certainty evidence that nutritional rating score labelling is associated with decreasing sales of SSBs. For menu‐board calorie labelling reported effects on SSB sales varied.

Nutrition standards in public institutions (16 studies): We found low‐certainty evidence that reduced availability of SSBs in schools is associated with decreased SSB consumption. We found very low‐certainty evidence that improved availability of drinking water in schools and school fruit programmes are associated with decreased SSB consumption. Reported associations between improved availability of drinking water in schools and student body weight varied.

Economic tools (7 studies): We found moderate‐certainty evidence that price increases on SSBs are associated with decreasing SSB sales. For price discounts on low‐calorie beverages reported effects on SSB sales varied.

Whole food supply interventions (3 studies): Reported associations between voluntary industry initiatives to improve the whole food supply and SSB sales varied.

Retail and food service interventions (7 studies): We found low‐certainty evidence that healthier default beverages in children’s menus in chain restaurants are associated with decreasing SSB sales, and moderate‐certainty evidence that in‐store promotion of healthier beverages in supermarkets is associated with decreasing SSB sales. We found very low‐certainty evidence that urban planning restrictions on new fast‐food restaurants and restrictions on the number of stores selling SSBs in remote communities are associated with decreasing SSB sales. Reported associations between promotion of healthier beverages in vending machines and SSB intake or sales varied.

Intersectoral approaches (8 studies): We found moderate‐certainty evidence that government food benefit programmes with restrictions on purchasing SSBs are associated with decreased SSB intake. For unrestricted food benefit programmes reported effects varied. We found moderate‐certainty evidence that multicomponent community campaigns focused on SSBs are associated with decreasing SSB sales. Reported associations between trade and investment liberalisation and SSB sales varied.

Home‐based interventions (7 studies): We found moderate‐certainty evidence that improved availability of low‐calorie beverages in the home environment is associated with decreased SSB intake, and high‐certainty evidence that it is associated with decreased body weight among adolescents with overweight or obesity and a high baseline consumption of SSBs.

Adverse outcomes reported by studies, which may occur in some circumstances, included negative effects on revenue, compensatory SSB consumption outside school when the availability of SSBs in schools is reduced, reduced milk intake, stakeholder discontent, and increased total energy content of grocery purchases with price discounts on low‐calorie beverages, among others. The certainty of evidence on adverse outcomes was low to very low for most outcomes.

We analysed interventions targeting sugar‐sweetened milk separately, and found low‐ to moderate‐certainty evidence that emoticon labelling and small prizes for the selection of healthier beverages in elementary school cafeterias are associated with decreased consumption of sugar‐sweetened milk. We found low‐certainty evidence that improved placement of plain milk in school cafeterias is not associated with decreasing sugar‐sweetened milk consumption.

Authors' conclusions

The evidence included in this review indicates that effective, scalable interventions addressing SSB consumption at a population level exist. Implementation should be accompanied by high‐quality evaluations using appropriate study designs, with a particular focus on the long‐term effects of approaches suitable for large‐scale implementation.

Introduction: A high intake of sugar, in particular from sugar-sweetened soft drinks, increases the risk for obesity, type 2 diabetes mellitus and dental caries. Germany has pursued a national strategy for sugar reduction in soft drinks based on voluntary commitments by industry since 2015, but its effects are unclear. Methods: We use aggregated annual sales data from Euromonitor International to assess trends in mean sales-weighted sugar content of soft drinks and per capita sugar sales from soft drinks in Germany from 2015-2021. We compare these trends to the reduction path set by Germany’s national sugar reduction strategy, and to data for the United Kingdom, which adopted a soft drinks tax in 2017 and which we selected as best practice comparison country based on pre-defined criteria. Results: Between 2015-2021, the mean sales-weighted sugar content of soft drinks sold in Germany decreased by 2% from 5.3 to 5.2 g/100ml, falling short of an interim 9% reduction target and a 29% reduction observed in the United Kingdom over the same period. Sugar sales from soft drinks in Germany decreased from 22.4 to 21.6 g/capita/day (-4%) between 2015-2021, but remain high from a public health perspective. Conclusions: Reductions observed under Germany’s sugar reduction strategy fall short of stated targets and trends observed internationally under best practice conditions. Additional policy measures may be needed to support sugar reduction in soft drinks in Germany.

Summary Background Food environments have been recognised as highly influential on population diets. Government policies have great potential to create healthy food environments to promote healthy diets. This study aimed to evaluate food environment policy implementation in European countries and identify priority actions for governments to create healthy food environments. Methods The Healthy Food Environment Policy Index (Food-EPI) was used to evaluate the level of food environment policy and infrastructure support implementation in Estonia, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, and Spain in 2019–2021. Evidence of implementation of food environment policies was compiled in each country and validated by government officials. National experts evaluated the implementation of policies and identified priority recommendations. Findings Finland had the highest proportion (32%, n = 7/22) of policies shaping food environments with a “high” level of implementation. Slovenia and Poland had the highest proportion of policies rated at very low implementation (42%, n = 10/24 and 36%, n = 9/25 respectively). Policies regarding food provision, promotion, retail, funding, monitoring, and health in all policies were identified as the most important gaps across the European countries. Experts recommended immediate action on setting standards for nutrients of concern in processed foods, improvement of school food environments, fruit and vegetable subsidies, unhealthy food and beverage taxation, and restrictions on unhealthy food marketing to children. Interpretation Immediate implementation of policies and infrastructure support that prioritize action towards healthy food environments is urgently required to tackle the burden of obesity and diet-related non-communicable diseases in Europe. Funding This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 774548 and from the Joint Programming Initiative “A Healthy Diet for a Healthy Life”.

Background: Taxation of sugar and sugar-sweetened beverages is considered a key policy for improving population-level nutrition. Implementation is influenced by the way evidence is used and framed in public debates. At this time, no sugar tax has been implemented in Germany. Aims and objectives: This study aims to deepen the understanding of the political dynamics that influence the adoption of sugar taxes by analysing the use of evidence in the German media debate on sugar taxation and comparing its findings with analyses from other countries. Methods: In 114 German newspaper articles, published between 01/2018 and 03/2019, we analysed the use and framing of evidence with an abductive thematic analysis approach. We compared our findings with analyses on the framing around sugar taxation from Mexico, the US and the UK. Findings: Evidence was a salient component of the German debate. As in the comparison countries, evidence was used by both tax proponents and opponents but framed differently, for example, regarding problem definitions. However, the German debate relied more strongly on examples from other countries and less on economic arguments. Discussion and conclusions: Our findings suggest that German tax proponents should proactively consider economic arguments and counter spurious arguments made by tax opponents. Researchers should be aware of their work's potential international spillover effects, and public health advocates should correct expectations regarding the evidence on, and health effects of, isolated measures against obesity. To deepen the understanding of the German policy process, further research should involve social media, public documents and stakeholder networks.

Background: Framing plays an important role in health-policy processes. Responsibility for health is a salient and contested concept in the framing around food policies, such as sugar taxes. To deepen the understanding of the sugar tax process in Germany and contribute to a better understanding of how responsibility frames are used in debates on health policies, this study investigated responsibility concepts underlying the German media debate on sugar taxation. Methods: We analyzed 114 national German newspaper articles, published between January 2018 and March 2019, following an inductive thematic analysis approach with an additional deductive focus on responsibility. We identified important contested concepts around sugar taxation, analyzed their combination into narrative frames, and scrutinized those narrative frames for underlying responsibility concepts. Results: First, we identified important contested concepts regarding problems, actors and solutions (i.e. sugar tax and its potential alternatives). Those laid the basis for 13 narrative frames, of which the 'unscrupulous industry', 'government failure', 'vulnerable youth' and the 'oversimplification', 'responsible industry' and 'nanny state' frames were most salient. Within the narrative frames, we found a dominance of societal responsibility framing with a conflict between binding, legislative measures and voluntary solutions in cooperation with the food and beverages industry. Conclusions: Questions around societal responsibility for health and corporate social responsibility framing become more salient in sugar tax debates. Future research should, therefore, investigate how public health advocates can successfully engage with corporate social responsibility narratives, and how legislative measures can be framed in ways that engender trust in governmental actions.