Has the increased participation in the national campaign 'Dry January' been associated with cutting down alcohol consumption in England?

Philippa Case; Colin Angus; Frank  de Vocht; John Holmes; Susan F Michie; Jamie Brown

doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108938

Has the increased participation in the national campaign 'Dry January' been associated with cutting down alcohol consumption in England?

Philippa Case^*
, Colin Angus
, Frank de Vocht
, John Holmes
, Susan F Michie
, Jamie Brown

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article (Academic Journal) › peer-review

17 Citations (Scopus)

204 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

AIMS: Dry January is a national multimedia campaign in the UK that encourages people to abstain from drinking alcohol during the month of January. The population-level campaign makes extensive use of email and social media to support participants and has reported a substantial increase in participation since 2015. This study aimed to assess whether the increase in participation in Dry January between 2015 and 2018 was associated with reduced alcohol consumption in England.

DESIGN: Repeat cross-sectional design.

SETTING: England, March 2014 to January 2018.

PARTICIPANTS: A total of 37,142 respondents to the Alcohol Toolkit Study, a monthly in-home survey of alcohol consumption among representative cross-sectional samples of people aged 16+ years in England.

MEASURES: Outcomes included i) percentage of adults reporting drinking monthly or less frequently in the last 6 months and ii) mean weekly alcohol consumption among drinkers derived from the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test questions on typical frequency and quantity in the last 6 months.

ANALYSES: For each outcome, regression models were fitted for month: January (2015 and 2018) vs March-December (2014 and 2017) and for year: 2014/15 vs 2017/18. Interaction terms were included in the models to examine whether the difference between January and the preceding months on each outcome measure depended upon the year (2014/15 vs 2017/18). For non-significant interactions, Bayes factors were calculated to assess the relative strength of evidence for large effects (OR = 1.80 on monthly drinking and β=-1.0 on mean consumption) compared with the null.

RESULTS: Differences between January and other months were similar in 2014/15 and 2017/18 for adults reporting drinking monthly or less frequently and the mean consumption among drinkers (OR = 0.91, 95 %CI 0.79-1.05, BF = 0.05; β = 0.55, 95 %CI=-0.14 to 1.25, BF = 0.13 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS: The increase in participation in Dry January between 2015 and 2018 was not associated with large corresponding changes in people drinking monthly or less frequently over the last 6 months, or in mean weekly consumption among drinkers.

Original language	English
Article number	108938
Journal	Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Volume	227
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108938
Publication status	Published - 1 Oct 2021

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The Alcohol Toolkit Study receives funding from the NIHR School for Public Health Research (SPHR1 and 2). SPHR is a partnership between universities. Data collection for the Alcohol and Smoking Toolkit Studies were supported by Cancer Research UK ( C1417/A22962 ). The views expressed are those of the authors(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, NIHR, or Department of Health. No funders had any involvement in the design of the study, the analysis or interpretation of the data, the writing of the report, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. JB is a member of the SPECTRUM consortium, supported by the UK Prevention Research Partnership ( MR/S037519/1 ). PC is funded by the Medical Research Council’s Doctoral Training Programme .

Funding Information:
The Alcohol Toolkit Study receives funding from the NIHR School for Public Health Research (SPHR1 and 2). SPHR is a partnership between universities. Data collection for the Alcohol and Smoking Toolkit Studies were supported by Cancer Research UK (C1417/A22962). The views expressed are those of the authors(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, NIHR, or Department of Health. No funders had any involvement in the design of the study, the analysis or interpretation of the data, the writing of the report, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. JB is a member of the SPECTRUM consortium, supported by the UK Prevention Research Partnership (MR/S037519/1). PC is funded by the Medical Research Council's Doctoral Training Programme.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Author(s)

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Research Groups and Themes

NIHR ARC West

Keywords

Adult
Alcohol Drinking/epidemiology
Alcoholism
Bayes Theorem
Cross-Sectional Studies
England/epidemiology
Humans

Access to Document

10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108938Licence: CC BY

Full-text PDF (final published version)
This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via Elsevier at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108938 . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Final published version, 592 KBLicence: CC BY

Handle.net

Persistent link

Embargoed Document

Full text PDF (accepted author manuscript)
Accepted author manuscript, 736 KB
Licence: CC BY-NC-ND
Request copy

Cite this

@article{2a0a67b51b7242bcaa8cbd90ed8704a3,

title = "Has the increased participation in the national campaign 'Dry January' been associated with cutting down alcohol consumption in England?",

abstract = "AIMS: Dry January is a national multimedia campaign in the UK that encourages people to abstain from drinking alcohol during the month of January. The population-level campaign makes extensive use of email and social media to support participants and has reported a substantial increase in participation since 2015. This study aimed to assess whether the increase in participation in Dry January between 2015 and 2018 was associated with reduced alcohol consumption in England.DESIGN: Repeat cross-sectional design.SETTING: England, March 2014 to January 2018.PARTICIPANTS: A total of 37,142 respondents to the Alcohol Toolkit Study, a monthly in-home survey of alcohol consumption among representative cross-sectional samples of people aged 16+ years in England.MEASURES: Outcomes included i) percentage of adults reporting drinking monthly or less frequently in the last 6 months and ii) mean weekly alcohol consumption among drinkers derived from the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test questions on typical frequency and quantity in the last 6 months.ANALYSES: For each outcome, regression models were fitted for month: January (2015 and 2018) vs March-December (2014 and 2017) and for year: 2014/15 vs 2017/18. Interaction terms were included in the models to examine whether the difference between January and the preceding months on each outcome measure depended upon the year (2014/15 vs 2017/18). For non-significant interactions, Bayes factors were calculated to assess the relative strength of evidence for large effects (OR = 1.80 on monthly drinking and β=-1.0 on mean consumption) compared with the null.RESULTS: Differences between January and other months were similar in 2014/15 and 2017/18 for adults reporting drinking monthly or less frequently and the mean consumption among drinkers (OR = 0.91, 95 \%CI 0.79-1.05, BF = 0.05; β = 0.55, 95 \%CI=-0.14 to 1.25, BF = 0.13 respectively).CONCLUSIONS: The increase in participation in Dry January between 2015 and 2018 was not associated with large corresponding changes in people drinking monthly or less frequently over the last 6 months, or in mean weekly consumption among drinkers.",

keywords = "Adult, Alcohol Drinking/epidemiology, Alcoholism, Bayes Theorem, Cross-Sectional Studies, England/epidemiology, Humans",

author = "Philippa Case and Colin Angus and \{de Vocht\}, Frank and John Holmes and Michie, \{Susan F\} and Jamie Brown",

note = "Funding Information: The Alcohol Toolkit Study receives funding from the NIHR School for Public Health Research (SPHR1 and 2). SPHR is a partnership between universities. Data collection for the Alcohol and Smoking Toolkit Studies were supported by Cancer Research UK ( C1417/A22962 ). The views expressed are those of the authors(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, NIHR, or Department of Health. No funders had any involvement in the design of the study, the analysis or interpretation of the data, the writing of the report, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. JB is a member of the SPECTRUM consortium, supported by the UK Prevention Research Partnership ( MR/S037519/1 ). PC is funded by the Medical Research Council{\textquoteright}s Doctoral Training Programme . Funding Information: The Alcohol Toolkit Study receives funding from the NIHR School for Public Health Research (SPHR1 and 2). SPHR is a partnership between universities. Data collection for the Alcohol and Smoking Toolkit Studies were supported by Cancer Research UK (C1417/A22962). The views expressed are those of the authors(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, NIHR, or Department of Health. No funders had any involvement in the design of the study, the analysis or interpretation of the data, the writing of the report, or the decision to submit the paper for publication. JB is a member of the SPECTRUM consortium, supported by the UK Prevention Research Partnership (MR/S037519/1). PC is funded by the Medical Research Council's Doctoral Training Programme. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 The Author(s)",

year = "2021",

month = oct,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2021.108938",

language = "English",

volume = "227",

journal = "Drug and Alcohol Dependence",