| Title |
Harnessing advances in computer simulation to inform policy and planning to reduce alcohol-related harms
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Public Health, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00038-017-1041-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jo-An Atkinson, Dylan Knowles, John Wiggers, Michael Livingston, Robin Room, Ante Prodan, Geoff McDonnell, Eloise O’Donnell, Sandra Jones, Paul S. Haber, David Muscatello, Nadine Ezard, Nghi Phung, Louise Freebairn, Devon Indig, Lucie Rychetnik, Jaithri Ananthapavan, Sonia Wutzke, On behalf of the alcohol modelling consortium |
| Abstract |
Alcohol misuse is a complex systemic problem. The aim of this study was to explore the feasibility of using a transparent and participatory agent-based modelling approach to develop a robust decision support tool to test alcohol policy scenarios before they are implemented in the real world. A consortium of Australia's leading alcohol experts was engaged to collaboratively develop an agent-based model of alcohol consumption behaviour and related harms. As a case study, four policy scenarios were examined. A 19.5 ± 2.5% reduction in acute alcohol-related harms was estimated with the implementation of a 3 a.m. licensed venue closing time plus 1 a.m. lockout; and a 9 ± 2.6% reduction in incidence was estimated with expansion of treatment services to reach 20% of heavy drinkers. Combining the two scenarios produced a 33.3 ± 2.7% reduction in the incidence of acute alcohol-related harms, suggesting a synergistic effect. This study demonstrates the feasibility of participatory development of a contextually relevant computer simulation model of alcohol-related harms and highlights the value of the approach in identifying potential policy responses that best leverage limited resources. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 21% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Professor | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 12 | 21% |
| Unknown | 17 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 12 | 21% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 7% |
| Psychology | 4 | 7% |
| Engineering | 3 | 5% |
| Mathematics | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 24 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 September 2022.
All research outputs
#2,162,258
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Public Health
#236
of 1,900 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#41,600
of 336,759 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Public Health
#5
of 30 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,900 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,759 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 30 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.