Understanding the use of media analysis in public health research through food tax debates (HEALTHEI Project): a scoping review.


Journal

Lancet (London, England)
ISSN: 1474-547X
Titre abrégé: Lancet
Pays: England
ID NLM: 2985213R

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Nov 2023
Historique:
received: 15 05 2023
revised: 18 08 2023
accepted: 22 09 2023
medline: 27 11 2023
pubmed: 24 11 2023
entrez: 24 11 2023
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Poor diet is a major public health concern. In 2021, 63·8% of adults and 22·2% of reception-age children were either overweight or obese in England. Fiscal interventions have become a popular policy measure to reduce obesity and encourage healthy eating. Such measures are highly controversial, leading to media debate promoting pro-tax and anti-tax arguments. To better understand food tax debates and the use of media analysis in public health research, we conducted a scoping review of media analyses using food taxes as a case study. In this scoping review, we searched SCOPUS, PubMed, and EBSCOhost databases on Feb 14-22, 2023, using keyword variations for "food", "tax", and "media analysis". Results were restricted to English-only, peer-reviewed journal articles. The initial results were manually screened through an iterative process to exclude articles that did not analyse a food tax, were non-English language, were not peer-reviewed, or did not use media analysis as the primary method. Modelled on Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) five-stage review protocol, two researchers used a coding framework to independently code all articles and checked result quality through regular discussion. Extracted data included article title, author, year, country, tax type, media sources used, identified media frames, and research aims, methods, results, and conclusions. Results are reported according to PRISMA guidelines and data files submitted to FigShare Repository (non-accessible). Of 1087 articles reviewed, 19 were eligible to be included in the study. Articles were published between 2013 and 2023, with 2021 having the highest concentration of studies carried out mainly in UK and USA. Despite search terms encompassing a range of food products, the retrieved media analyses focused on three types of food product taxes: sugar-sweetened beverages, meat, and groceries. Most articles explored arguments for and against policy implementation, with some investigating stakeholder representation. Results demonstrate that stakeholders' arguments, both positive and negative, are consistent across countries and food products. The consistency of how both pro-tax and anti-tax arguments are presented in the media demonstrates the importance of coordination between stakeholder groups to influence policy adoption. To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate media analysis across a diverse range of food products. National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR).

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Poor diet is a major public health concern. In 2021, 63·8% of adults and 22·2% of reception-age children were either overweight or obese in England. Fiscal interventions have become a popular policy measure to reduce obesity and encourage healthy eating. Such measures are highly controversial, leading to media debate promoting pro-tax and anti-tax arguments. To better understand food tax debates and the use of media analysis in public health research, we conducted a scoping review of media analyses using food taxes as a case study.
METHODS METHODS
In this scoping review, we searched SCOPUS, PubMed, and EBSCOhost databases on Feb 14-22, 2023, using keyword variations for "food", "tax", and "media analysis". Results were restricted to English-only, peer-reviewed journal articles. The initial results were manually screened through an iterative process to exclude articles that did not analyse a food tax, were non-English language, were not peer-reviewed, or did not use media analysis as the primary method. Modelled on Arksey and O'Malley's (2005) five-stage review protocol, two researchers used a coding framework to independently code all articles and checked result quality through regular discussion. Extracted data included article title, author, year, country, tax type, media sources used, identified media frames, and research aims, methods, results, and conclusions. Results are reported according to PRISMA guidelines and data files submitted to FigShare Repository (non-accessible).
FINDINGS RESULTS
Of 1087 articles reviewed, 19 were eligible to be included in the study. Articles were published between 2013 and 2023, with 2021 having the highest concentration of studies carried out mainly in UK and USA. Despite search terms encompassing a range of food products, the retrieved media analyses focused on three types of food product taxes: sugar-sweetened beverages, meat, and groceries. Most articles explored arguments for and against policy implementation, with some investigating stakeholder representation. Results demonstrate that stakeholders' arguments, both positive and negative, are consistent across countries and food products.
INTERPRETATION CONCLUSIONS
The consistency of how both pro-tax and anti-tax arguments are presented in the media demonstrates the importance of coordination between stakeholder groups to influence policy adoption. To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate media analysis across a diverse range of food products.
FUNDING BACKGROUND
National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR).

Identifiants

pubmed: 37997136
pii: S0140-6736(23)02060-3
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(23)02060-3
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Systematic Review Review Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

S9

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Anette Bonifant Cisneros (AB)

Centre for Food Policy, City, University of London, London, UK.

Rachel Headings (R)

Centre for Food Policy, City, University of London, London, UK. Electronic address: rachel.headings.2@city.ac.uk.

Rebecca Wells (R)

Centre for Food Policy, City, University of London, London, UK.

Christian Reynolds (C)

Centre for Food Policy, City, University of London, London, UK.

Christina Vogel (C)

Centre for Food Policy, City, University of London, London, UK; MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Centre, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.

Penny Breeze (P)

Health Economics and Decision Science, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH