The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Minimum alcohol pricing: a shameful episode
Open accessAbstract
This time last year public health campaigners and policy makers were confident that a minimum price on a unit of alcohol would be introduced across the United Kingdom. The evidence for substantial health benefits and cost savings was clear, a public consultation on the level of the price was just closing, Scotland had introduced a minimum unit price (though now under legal challenge by the drinks industry), and the UK prime minister had given his personal commitment that England and Wales would follow suit. Then in July the government announced that the policy had been shelved. The politics behind this sudden U-turn have been something of a mystery. The Home Office minister Jeremy Browne gave as his reason …
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“A significant proportion of chronic pain and problematic opioid use issues can be linked to the acute phase after major surgery, when patients are commonly prescribed opioid analgesics to manage their postsurgical pain.6,7”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to manage pain and opioid use after major surgery: Preliminary outcomes from the Toronto General Hospital Transitional Pain Service (2017) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Moreover, 3% and 0.4% of previously opioid-naïve patients continue to use opioids 3 months7 and 1 year after major surgery, respectively, likely due to persistent postsurgical pain.6”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to manage pain and opioid use after major surgery: Preliminary outcomes from the Toronto General Hospital Transitional Pain Service (2017) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Patients taking a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or a benzodiazepine prior to surgery to treat depression or anxiety have been identified as having the highest risk of persisting on opioids following major surgery.6,14”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to manage pain and opioid use after major surgery: Preliminary outcomes from the Toronto General Hospital Transitional Pain Service (2017) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Thus, the ACT group was at higher risk of persistent pain, pain-related disability, depression, and long-term, high-dose opioid use.6,13,41”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to manage pain and opioid use after major surgery: Preliminary outcomes from the Toronto General Hospital Transitional Pain Service (2017) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Surgical patients who are highly distressed and anxious are more likely to develop persistent postsurgical pain13,50 and to use higher doses of opioids.6”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to manage pain and opioid use after major surgery: Preliminary outcomes from the Toronto General Hospital Transitional Pain Service (2017) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Different surgical modalities are known to yield different rates of CPSP13 and extended opioid use.6”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy to manage pain and opioid use after major surgery: Preliminary outcomes from the Toronto General Hospital Transitional Pain Service (2017) · cites this paper as [6]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Abid Azam, M., Weinrib, A. Z., Montbriand, J., Burns, L. C., McMillan, K., Clarke, H., & Katz, J. (2017) · Canadian Journal of Pain · doi:10.1080/24740527.2017.1325317 · Cited by 90
Alcohol Harm Reduction: Corporate Capture of a Key Concept
McCambridge, J., Kypri, K., Drummond, C., & Strang, J. (2014) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001767 · Cited by 54
“Even so, the alcohol industry has successfully delayed implementation of MUP in Scotland through appeals against legal decisions within the European Union [14], mimicking the tactics of the tobacco industry [15].”
BackgroundInfluentialHawkins, B., & Mccambridge, J. (2020) · British Journal of Politics & International Relations · doi:10.1177/1369148120959040 · Cited by 22
“However, it was announced in July 2013 that the government would not bring forward measures to implement the policy, citing the need for more evidence of its effects, a decision that was strongly criticised by public health actors (Godlee, 2014).”
BackgroundPolicy communities, devolution and policy transfer: The case of alcohol pricing in Wales
Lesch, M., & McCambridge, J. (2021) · Regional & Federal Studies · doi:10.1080/13597566.2021.1934454 · Cited by 15
“In 2012, the UK government announced its intention to implement MUP but then reversed these plans in the face of industry pressure (Godlee 2013; Gornall 2014).”
BackgroundReducing Harm Through Evidence‐Based Alcohol Policies: Challenges and Options
Giesbrecht, N., Bosma, L. M., & Reisdorfer, E. (2019) · World Medical & Health Policy · doi:10.1002/wmh3.314 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Godlee, F.
- Corresponding author
- Godlee, F.
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2014-01-08
- Volume
- 348
- Issue
- jan08 1
- Pages
- g110-g110
- ISSN
- 1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2020201848
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 2
- FWCI
- 3.67
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Update notices
- correction (2014-01-13)
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
- Keywords
- minimum unit pricing, alcohol pricing policy, alcohol policy, public health policy, policy reversal, alcohol-related harm, cost reduction, public consultation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
