Cited by 253Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects

Are the “Best Buys” for Alcohol Control Still Valid? An Update on the Comparative Cost-Effectiveness of Alcohol Control Strategies at the Global Level

Chisholm, Dan, Moro, Daniela, Bertram, Melanie, Pretorius, Carel, Gmel, Gerrit, Shield, Kevin, Rehm, Jürgen·2018·Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Evidence on the comparative cost-effectiveness of alcohol control strategies is a relevant input into public policy and resource allocation. At the global level, this evidence has been used to identify so-called best buys for noncommunicable disease prevention and control. This article uses global evidence on alcohol use exposures and risk relations, as well as on intervention costs and impacts, to re-examine the comparative cost-effectiveness of a range of alcohol control strategies. METHOD: A "generalized" approach to cost-effectiveness analysis was adopted. A new modeling tool (OneHealth) was used to estimate the population-level effects of interventions. Interventions that reduce the harmful use of alcohol included brief psychosocial interventions, excise taxes, and the enactment as well as enforcement of restrictions on alcohol marketing, availability, and drink-driving laws. Costs were estimated in international dollars for the year 2010 and effects expressed in healthy life years gained. Analysis was carried out for 16 countries spanning low-, middle-, and high-income settings. RESULTS: Increasing excise taxes has a low cost (<I$0.10 per capita) and a highly favorable ratio of costs to effects (<I$100 per healthy life year gained in both low- and high-income settings). Availability and marketing restrictions are also highly cost effective (<I$100 in low-income settings and <I$500 in high-income settings). Enforcement of drink-driving laws and blood alcohol concentration limits via sobriety checkpoints had cost-effectiveness ratios in the range of I$1,500-3,000. Brief psychosocial treatments were <I$150 and

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.15288/jsad.2018.79.514

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Legislative measures that reduce harmful behaviours such as excess alcohol consumption have been modelled as cost-effective in all WHO regions.

    “Legislative measures that reduce harmful behaviours such as excess alcohol consumption have been modelled as cost-effective in all WHO regions. 442”

    From The Lancet Psychiatry Commission on youth mental health (2024) · cites this paper as [442]

  • A broad array of patient-level alcohol harm reduction interventions, including brief interventions, psychosocial interventions, and pharmacological treatments, have been found to be effective in high-resource settings.

    “A broad array of patient-level alcohol harm reduction interventions, such as brief interventions (for this paper, defined as any intervention ranging from advice to counseling, lasting less than 1 hour per session [7] up to 4 sessions [8], psychosocial interventions, and pharmacological treatments) have been found to be effective in high-resource settings [9,10].”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chisholm, D., Moro, D., Bertram, M., Pretorius, C., Gmel, G., Shield, K., & Rehm, J.
Affiliations
  • World Health Organization (CH)
  • University of Cagliari (IT)
  • Avenir Health (US)
  • Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
Venue
Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs
Published
2018-07
Volume
79
Issue
4
Pages
514-522
ISSN
  • 1937-1888 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-4114
OpenAlex
W2886141074
Cited by
253
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 39 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 4
FWCI
21.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
World Health Organization
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Keywords
cost-effectiveness, Best Buy, excise tax, alcohol marketing restrictions, alcohol availability restrictions, sobriety checkpoints, brief psychosocial intervention, hazardous drinking, healthy life years, non-communicable disease prevention
MeSH terms
Blood Alcohol Content, Alcohol Drinking, Automobile Driving, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Female, Humans, Male, Public Policy, Taxes, Global Health, Marketing

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