Nour Schoueri-Mychasiw1, Ashini Weerasinghe1, Tim Stockwell2, Kate Vallance2, David Hammond3, Thomas K Greenfield4, Jonathan McGavock5, Erin Hobin1,6. 1. Health Promotion, Chronic Disease and Injury Prevention, Public Health Ontario, Toronto, Canada. 2. Canadian Institute for Substance Use Research, University of Victoria, Victoria, Canada. 3. School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada. 4. Alcohol Research Group, Public Health Institute, Emeryville, USA. 5. Children's Hospital Research Institute of Manitoba, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada. 6. Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: This paper examines the impact of an alcohol labelling intervention on recall of and support for standard drink (SD) labels, estimating the number of SDs in alcohol containers, and intended and unintended use of SD labels. DESIGN AND METHODS: A quasi-experimental study was conducted in Canada where labels with a cancer warning, national drinking guidelines and SD information were applied to alcohol containers in the single liquor store in the intervention site, while usual labelling continued in the two liquor stores in the comparison site. Three waves of surveys were conducted in both sites before and at two time-points after the intervention with 2049 cohort participants. Generalised estimating equations were applied to estimate changes in all outcomes. RESULTS: Participants in the intervention relative to the comparison site had greater odds of recalling [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 5.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.02, 10.71] and supporting SD labels (AOR 1.49, 95% CI 1.04, 2.12) and lower odds of reporting using SD labels to purchase high strength, low-cost alcohol (AOR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45, 0.93). Exposure to the labels had negligible effects on accurately estimating the number of SDs (AOR 1.06, 95% CI 0.59, 1.93) and using SD labels to drink within guidelines (AOR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75, 1.46). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-informed labels increased support for and decreased unintended use of SD labels. Such labels can improve accuracy in estimating the number of SDs in alcohol containers and adherence to drinking guidelines.
INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: This paper examines the impact of an alcohol labelling intervention on recall of and support for standard drink (SD) labels, estimating the number of SDs in alcohol containers, and intended and unintended use of SD labels. DESIGN AND METHODS: A quasi-experimental study was conducted in Canada where labels with a cancer warning, national drinking guidelines and SD information were applied to alcohol containers in the single liquor store in the intervention site, while usual labelling continued in the two liquor stores in the comparison site. Three waves of surveys were conducted in both sites before and at two time-points after the intervention with 2049 cohort participants. Generalised estimating equations were applied to estimate changes in all outcomes. RESULTS: Participants in the intervention relative to the comparison site had greater odds of recalling [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 5.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.02, 10.71] and supporting SD labels (AOR 1.49, 95% CI 1.04, 2.12) and lower odds of reporting using SD labels to purchase high strength, low-cost alcohol (AOR 0.65, 95% CI 0.45, 0.93). Exposure to the labels had negligible effects on accurately estimating the number of SDs (AOR 1.06, 95% CI 0.59, 1.93) and using SD labels to drink within guidelines (AOR 1.04, 95% CI 0.75, 1.46). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: Evidence-informed labels increased support for and decreased unintended use of SD labels. Such labels can improve accuracy in estimating the number of SDs in alcohol containers and adherence to drinking guidelines.
Authors: Barry D Weiss; Mary Z Mays; William Martz; Kelley Merriam Castro; Darren A DeWalt; Michael P Pignone; Joy Mockbee; Frank A Hale Journal: Ann Fam Med Date: 2005 Nov-Dec Impact factor: 5.166
Authors: Erin Hobin; Nour Schoueri-Mychasiw; Ashini Weerasinghe; Kate Vallance; David Hammond; Thomas K Greenfield; Jonathan McGavock; Catherine Paradis; Tim Stockwell Journal: Int J Drug Policy Date: 2020-03-12
Authors: Elena Swift; Ron Borland; K Michael Cummings; Geoffrey T Fong; Ann McNeill; David Hammond; James F Thrasher; Timea R Partos; Hua-Hie Yong Journal: Tob Control Date: 2014-11-10 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Anna K M Blackwell; Katie Drax; Angela S Attwood; Marcus R Munafò; Olivia M Maynard Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Ashini Weerasinghe; Nour Schoueri-Mychasiw; Kate Vallance; Tim Stockwell; David Hammond; Jonathan McGavock; Thomas K Greenfield; Catherine Paradis; Erin Hobin Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-01-07 Impact factor: 3.390