Youth exposure to alcohol advertising on television in the UK, the Netherlands and Germany.

BACKGROUND: Exposure of young people to alcohol advertising is a risk factor for underage drinking. This study assessed youth exposure to television alcohol advertising in the UK, the Netherlands and Germany, from December 2010 to May 2011. METHODS: A negative binomial regression model predicted number of alcohol advertisements from the proportion of the television viewership in each age group. This allowed comparison of alcohol advertisement incidence for each youth age category relative to an adult reference category. RESULTS: In the UK, those aged 10-15 years were significantly more exposed to alcohol advertisements per viewing hour than adults aged ≥ 25 years [incidence rate ratio (IRR) = 1.11; 95% confidence interval (95% CI): 1.06, 1.18; P < 0.01]; in the Netherlands, those aged 13-19 years were more exposed per viewing hour than adults aged ≥ 20 years (IRR = 1.29; 95% CI: 1.19, 1.39; P < 0.01). Conversely, in Germany, those aged 10-15 years were less exposed to alcohol advertisements than adults aged ≥ 25 years (IRR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.73, 0.85; P < 0.01). In each country, young children (aged 4-9 years in the UK and Germany, 6-12 years in the Netherlands) were less exposed than adults. CONCLUSION: Adolescents in the UK and the Netherlands, but not Germany, had higher exposure to television alcohol advertising relative to adults than would be expected from their television viewing. Further work across a wider range of countries is needed to understand the relationship between national policies and youth exposure to alcohol advertising on television.

Do patients always prefer quicker treatment? : a discrete choice analysis of patients' stated preferences in the London Patient Choice Project.

The London Patient Choice Project (LPCP) was established to offer NHS patients more choice over where and when they receive treatment, and to reduce waiting times. The LPCP offered those patients waiting around 6 months for elective procedures a choice of treatment at an alternative NHS or private hospital, or treatment at an overseas hospital.The aim of this article is to investigate the following questions regarding patients' response to choice: (a) What are the factors that patients consider when deciding whether to accept the alternatives they are offered? (b) What is the relative importance to patients of each factor when making their choices, i.e. what trade-offs are patients prepared to make between time waited and other factors? (c) Are there any systematic differences between subgroups of patients (in terms of their personal, health and sociodemographic characteristics) in their response to choice?Patients' preferences were elicited using a discrete choice experiment. Patients eligible to participate in the LPCP were recruited prior to being offered their choice between hospitals and each presented with seven hypothetical choices via a self-completed questionnaire. Data were received from 2114 patients. Thirty percent of respondents consistently chose their 'current' over the 'alternative' hospital. All the attributes and levels examined in the experiment were found to exhibit a significant influence on patients' likelihood of opting for an alternative provider, in the expected direction. Age, education and income had an important effect on the 'uptake' of choice. Our results suggest several important implications for policy. First, there may be equity concerns arising from some patient subgroups being more predisposed to accept choice. Second, although reduced waiting time is important to most patients, it is not all that matters. For example, the reputation of the proffered alternatives is of key importance, suggesting careful thought is required about what information on quality and reputation can/should be made available and how it should be made available to facilitate informed choice.