316 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 36539775)
21. Changes in beverage purchases following the announcement and implementation of South Africa's Health Promotion Levy: an observational study.
Stacey N; Edoka I; Hofman K; Swart EC; Popkin B; Ng SW
Lancet Planet Health; 2021 Apr; 5(4):e200-e208. PubMed ID: 33838735
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Anticipatory changes in British household purchases of soft drinks associated with the announcement of the Soft Drinks Industry Levy: A controlled interrupted time series analysis.
Pell D; Penney TL; Mytton O; Briggs A; Cummins S; Rayner M; Rutter H; Scarborough P; Sharp SJ; Smith RD; White M; Adams J
PLoS Med; 2020 Nov; 17(11):e1003269. PubMed ID: 33180869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Targeted Beverage Taxes Influence Food and Beverage Purchases among Households with Preschool Children.
Ford CN; Ng SW; Popkin BM
J Nutr; 2015 Aug; 145(8):1835-43. PubMed ID: 26063069
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. How do consumers respond to "sin taxes"? New evidence from a tax on sugary drinks.
Fichera E; Mora T; Lopez-Valcarcel BG; Roche D
Soc Sci Med; 2021 Apr; 274():113799. PubMed ID: 33684702
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Decomposing consumer and producer effects on sugar from beverage purchases after a sugar-based tax on beverages in South Africa.
Bercholz M; Ng SW; Stacey N; Swart EC
Econ Hum Biol; 2022 Aug; 46():101136. PubMed ID: 35358759
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting.
Roberto CA; Lawman HG; LeVasseur MT; Mitra N; Peterhans A; Herring B; Bleich SN
JAMA; 2019 May; 321(18):1799-1810. PubMed ID: 32930704
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. The impact of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes on purchases: Evidence from four city-level taxes in the United States.
Cawley J; Frisvold D; Jones D
Health Econ; 2020 Oct; 29(10):1289-1306. PubMed ID: 33463850
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. The Impact of a Sweetened Beverage Tax on Beverage Volume Sold in Cook County, Illinois, and Its Border Area.
Powell LM; Leider J; Léger PT
Ann Intern Med; 2020 Mar; 172(6):390-397. PubMed ID: 32092766
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Oakland's sugar-sweetened beverage tax: Impacts on prices, purchases and consumption by adults and children.
Cawley J; Frisvold D; Hill A; Jones D
Econ Hum Biol; 2020 May; 37():100865. PubMed ID: 32126505
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Comparison of Dietary Intake Before vs After Taxes on Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and Nonessential Energy-Dense Foods in Mexico, 2012 to 2018.
Batis C; Castellanos-Gutiérrez A; Sánchez-Pimienta TG; Reyes-García A; Colchero MA; Basto-Abreu A; Barrientos-Gutiérrez T; Rivera JA
JAMA Netw Open; 2023 Jul; 6(7):e2325191. PubMed ID: 37486629
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Evaluation of Changes in Beverage Prices and Volume Sold Following the Implementation and Repeal of a Sweetened Beverage Tax in Cook County, Illinois.
Powell LM; Leider J
JAMA Netw Open; 2020 Dec; 3(12):e2031083. PubMed ID: 33369659
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Longer-term impacts of the Oakland, California, sugar-sweetened beverage tax on prices and volume sold at two-years post-tax.
Leider J; Powell LM
Soc Sci Med; 2022 Jan; 292():114537. PubMed ID: 34838326
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. The impact of Seattle's Sweetened Beverage Tax on beverage prices and volume sold.
Powell LM; Leider J
Econ Hum Biol; 2020 May; 37():100856. PubMed ID: 32070906
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. Do high vs. low purchasers respond differently to a nonessential energy-dense food tax? Two-year evaluation of Mexico's 8% nonessential food tax.
Taillie LS; Rivera JA; Popkin BM; Batis C
Prev Med; 2017 Dec; 105S():S37-S42. PubMed ID: 28729195
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. Impact of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes on purchases and dietary intake: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Teng AM; Jones AC; Mizdrak A; Signal L; Genç M; Wilson N
Obes Rev; 2019 Sep; 20(9):1187-1204. PubMed ID: 31218808
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Evaluation of the sugar-sweetened beverage tax in Oakland, United States, 2015-2019: A quasi-experimental and cost-effectiveness study.
White JS; Basu S; Kaplan S; Madsen KA; Villas-Boas SB; Schillinger D
PLoS Med; 2023 Apr; 20(4):e1004212. PubMed ID: 37071600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Association of a Beverage Tax on Sugar-Sweetened and Artificially Sweetened Beverages With Changes in Beverage Prices and Sales at Chain Retailers in a Large Urban Setting.
Roberto CA; Lawman HG; LeVasseur MT; Mitra N; Peterhans A; Herring B; Bleich SN
JAMA; 2019 May; 321(18):1799-1810. PubMed ID: 31087022
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. U.S. Households' Children's Drink Purchases: 2006-2017 Trends and Associations With Marketing.
Choi YY; Andreyeva T; Fleming-Milici F; Harris JL
Am J Prev Med; 2022 Jan; 62(1):9-17. PubMed ID: 34922654
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Impact of a sugar-sweetened beverage tax two-year post-tax implementation in Seattle, Washington, United States.
Powell LM; Leider J
J Public Health Policy; 2021 Dec; 42(4):574-588. PubMed ID: 34732842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Taxes and front-of-package labels improve the healthiness of beverage and snack purchases: a randomized experimental marketplace.
Acton RB; Jones AC; Kirkpatrick SI; Roberto CA; Hammond D
Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act; 2019 May; 16(1):46. PubMed ID: 31113448
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
