Skip to main content

Table 3 Binary logistic regression models investigating awareness of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes in three countries

From: Tax awareness and perceived cost of sugar-sweetened beverages in four countries between 2017 and 2019: findings from the international food policy study

 

Mexico (n = 11,610)

UK (n = 9,140)

US (n = 3,829)

 

‘Yes’ a

‘Yes’

‘Yes’

 

Adjusted prevalence

OR (99% CI)

Adjusted prevalence

OR (99% CI)

Adjusted prevalence

OR (99% CI)

Year b

 2017

52.0%

[ref]

    

 2018

47.1%

0.82 (0.71, 0.95)*

60.4%

[ref]

  

 2019

41.1%

0.64 (0.56, 0.74)*

59.4%

0.96 (0.83, 1.11)

21.7%

 

Age

 18–29 years

38.5%

[ref]

63.1%

[ref]

25.5%

[ref]

 30–44 years

49.0%

1.54 (1.35, 1.75)*

62.6%

0.98 (0.78, 1.22)

24.6%

0.95 (0.64, 1.41)

 45–64 years

51.4%

1.69 (1.45, 1.97)*

62.6%

0.98 (0.78, 1.22)

19.1%

0.69 (0.47, 1.02)

 ≥ 65 years

48.2%

1.49 (0.94, 2.35)

51.1%

0.61 (0.49, 0.77)*

18.0%

0.64 (0.41, 1.00)

Sex

 Female

41.3%

0.64 (0.57, 0.72)*

58.2%

0.86 (0.75, 0.99)*

19.6%

0.78 (0.60, 1.02)

 Male

52.2%

[ref]

61.7%

[ref]

23.8%

[ref]

Ethnicity c

 Majority group

48.0%

1.11 (0.93, 1.31)

65.5%

1.61 (1.25, 2.08)*

19.1%

0.73 (0.54, 1.00)*

 Minority group

45.5%

[ref]

54.1%

[ref]

24.4%

[ref]

Education level d

 Low

41.0%

0.58 (0.50, 0.67)*

58.2%

0.82 (0.70, 0.97)*

22.6%

0.97 (0.74, 1.27)

 Medium

44.8%

0.68 (0.56, 0.82)*

58.7%

0.84 (0.72, 0.99)*

19.3%

0.79 (0.57, 1.10)

 High

54.5%

[ref]

62.8%

[ref]

23.1%

[ref]

Income adequacy e

 High

47.2%

1.04 (0.92, 1.17)

57.9%

0.85 (0.71, 1.01)

20.8%

0.90 (0.67, 1.22)

 Low

46.3%

[ref]

61.9%

[ref]

22.5%

[ref]

SSB healthfulness perceptions f

 Healthy

45.7%

0.92 (0.78, 1.08)

52.5%

0.54 (0.42, 0.71)*

25.2%

1.50 (1.05, 2.14)*

 Unhealthy

47.8%

[ref]

67.0%

[ref]

18.4%

[ref]

  1. Results from binary logistic regression models investigating correlates of awareness of sugar sweetened beverage taxes in Mexico, the United Kingdom, and the United States
  2. UK United Kingdom, US United States, OR odds ratio, CI 99% confidence interval, SSB sugar sweetened beverage
  3. *Significantly different (compared to reference group) at p < .01
  4. a Participants responding ‘Yes’ versus ‘No / Don’t know’ when asked, “Is there a special tax on sugary drinks in [country] that makes them more expensive to buy?”
  5. b Results for all year comparisons are provided in Additional file 4
  6. c Ethnicity categories as per census questions asked in each country: 1) Australia majority = only speaks English at home, minority = speaks a language besides English at home; 2) Canada majority = White, minority = other ethnicity; 3) Mexico majority = Non-indigenous, minority = indigenous; 4) United Kingdom majority = White, minority = other ethnicity; 5) US majority = White, minority = other ethnicity
  7. d Participants were asked, “What is the highest level of formal education that you have completed?” Responses were categorized as ‘low’ (completed secondary school or less), ‘medium’ (some post-secondary qualifications), or ‘high’ (university degree or higher) according to country-specific criteria
  8. e Participants were asked, “Thinking about your total monthly income, how difficult or easy is it for you to make ends meet?”, with response options ‘Very easy’, ‘Easy’ and ‘Neither easy nor difficult’ categorized as “High”, and ‘Difficult’ and ‘Very difficult’ categorized as “Low”
  9. f Participants were shown a 500 mL bottle of regular soda and asked, “In your opinion, how unhealthy or healthy is this type of drink?”, with response options ‘Very healthy’, ‘Healthy’, ‘A little healthy’ and ‘Neither healthy nor unhealthy’ categorized as “Healthy”, and ‘A little unhealthy’, ‘Unhealthy’ and ‘Very unhealthy’ categorized as “Unhealthy”
Back to article page

International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity

ISSN: 1479-5868

Contact us