Premium
Use as directed: do standard drink labels on alcohol containers help consumers drink (ir)responsibly? Real‐world evidence from a quasi‐experimental study in Yukon, Canada
Author(s) -
SchoueriMychasiw Nour,
Weerasinghe Ashini,
Stockwell Tim,
Vallance Kate,
Hammond David,
Greenfield Thomas K.,
McGavock Jonathan,
Hobin Erin
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
drug and alcohol review
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.018
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1465-3362
pISSN - 0959-5236
DOI - 10.1111/dar.13165
Subject(s) - confidence interval , odds , odds ratio , intervention (counseling) , medicine , unintended consequences , recall , environmental health , alcohol , poison control , suicide prevention , injury prevention , cohort , demography , psychology , logistic regression , psychiatry , chemistry , biochemistry , pathology , sociology , political science , law , cognitive psychology
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.