Nicki Jackson

Introduction: While effective policies exist to reduce alcohol‐related harm, political will to enact them is low in many jurisdictions. We aimed to identify key barriers and strategies for strengthening political priority for alcohol policy reform.Methods: A framework synthesis was conducted, incorporating relevant theory, key informant interviews (n = 37) and a scoping review. Thematic analysis informed the development of a framework for understanding and influencing political priority for alcohol policy.Results: Twelve barriers and 14 strategies were identified at multiple levels (global, national and local). Major barriers included neoliberal or free trade ideology, the globalised alcohol industry, limited advocate capacity and the normalisation of alcohol harms. Strategies fell into two categories: sector‐specific and system change initiatives. Sector‐specific strategies primarily focus on influencing policymakers and mobilising civil society. Examples include developing a clear, unified solution, coalition building and effective framing. System change initiatives target structural change to reduce the power imbalance between industry and civil society, such as restricting industry involvement in policymaking and securing sustainable funding for advocacy. A key example is establishing an international treaty, similar to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, to support domestic policymaking.Discussion and Conclusions: Our findings provide a framework for understanding and advancing political priority for alcohol policy. The framework highlights that progress can be achieved at various levels and through diverse groups of actors. The importance of upstream drivers of policymaking was a key finding, presenting challenges for time‐poor advocates, but offering potential facilitation through effective global leadership.

When prevention efforts fail, injured children require high-quality health services to support their recovery. Disparities in non-fatal injury outcomes, an indicator of health-care quality, have received minimal attention. We evaluated the extent to which general trauma follow-up studies published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature provide evidence of socially patterned inequities in health, functional or disability outcomes ≥4 weeks after childhood injuries. Using a systematic search, we identified 27 eligible cohort studies from 13 high-income countries. We examined the extent to which the reported health outcomes varied across the PROGRESS criteria: place of residence, race/ethnicity, occupation, gender/sex, religion, socio-economic status, and social capital. The available evidence on differential outcomes is limited as many studies were compromised by selection or retention biases that reduced the participation of children from demographic groups at increased risk of adverse outcomes, or the analyses mainly focused on variations in outcomes by sex. Given the limited research evidence, we recommend greater attention to systematic collection and reporting of non-fatal injury outcomes disaggregated by socio-demographic indicators in order to identify disparities where these exist and inform equity-focused interventions promoting the recovery of injured children.