Dataset 1 for "Alcohol consumption and attitudes to evidence-based alcohol policy in Donegal: findings from a student and general adult sample" (student data)

Dataset 1 for "Alcohol consumption and attitudes to evidence-based alcohol policy in Donegal: findings from a student and general adult sample" (student data). Note there is a connected second dataset that relates to the related publication.

Executive summary for published report:
In Ireland, the Public Health (Alcohol) Act 2018 was passed as a legislative framework to minimise alcohol consumption and related harm. The Act would require a shift in alcohol policy in Ireland, including changes around pricing, promotions, advertising, licencing, availability, and protecting young people. The aim of this research was to understand support for elements of the Public Health (Alcohol) Bill in Donegal County.

We asked two groups of Donegal residents their views, the first, 395 students based at Letterkenny Institute of Technology now Atlantic Technological University (student sample in 2018/19), and the second, 536 adults living in Donegal reached through email or Facebook advertisements (general adult sample in 2019/20).
Levels of Alcohol use
• 58% students and 53% adults drink hazardously (alcohol use which puts drinkers at risk of harm, or where they are experiencing harm from alcohol).
• 46% students and 36% adults drink six or more drinks on a single occasion monthly or more frequently in the past year.
• 23-25% consider someone in their house to be a heavy drinker.
• 19% said someone else’s drinking in their house negatively affected them in the past year.

Public health countermeasures: who should intervene?
• 27% students and 25% adults agreed individuals are responsible enough to protect themselves from harm;
• 58% students and 53% adults agreed public health bodies should intervene to protect from alcohol related harm;
• 65-70% agreed that health professionals should ask about alcohol use;
• 39-43% agreed adult alcohol treatment services were available in their area (26-32% agreed there were youth services).

Views on alcohol availability for adults and young people
• 19% students and 33% adults agreed we should reduce the number of alcohol outlets
• 21% students and 37% adults agreed we should separate alcohol sales from food or other goods
• 80% students and 86% adults agreed we should not sell alcohol to those under the age of 18 years
• 64% students and 69% adults agreed it was not acceptable to allow a child aged 15 to drink in their own home
• 34% students and 38% adults agreed it was not acceptable to allow a 16-17 year old to drink in their own home

Views on alcohol marketing to adults
• 81-82% agreed alcohol advertisements should include alcohol use risks.
• Students’ agreement where there should not be alcohol adverts:
• Sponsoring sporting teams (40%); Sports grounds (40%); Public transport (38%); Music events (17%).
• Adults’ agreement where there should not be alcohol adverts: Sponsoring sporting teams (58%); Sports grounds (61%); Public transport (33%); Music events (53%).

Views on alcohol marketing to young people
• 61% students and 77% adults agreed television adverts for alcohol should only be shown after 9pm
• 59% students and 86% adults agreed alcohol advertising targeting young people should be banned
• 80% students and 82% adults agreed alcohol adverts should not be in or near a school or early years’ service
• 85% students and 90% adults agreed alcohol providers should not sponsor children’s sporting teams

Price promotions and minimum unit pricing
• 36% students and 32% adults agreed hought minimum unit pricing was a good thing
• 61% students and 58% adults agreed price promotions on alcohol encourage excessive drinking
• 19% students and 33% adults agreed that price promotions in pubs,bars, and clubs should be banned
• 67% students and 37% adults agreed they were more likely to drink alcohol when it was sold at a discounted price

Support for evidence-based alcohol policy in relation to perceived local characteristics
Six evidence-based policy options were reviewed for support in relation to those who had reported second-hand impacts of alcohol consumption. These were restrictions on alcohol advertising to youth, a ban on selling to under 18-year-olds, a ban on price promotions, a reduction in the number of alcohol outlets, support for separate premises sales, and support for minimum unit pricing.
For the student sample, there was stronger support for evidence-based policy options when they had experienced second-hand impact of alcohol consumption. Students who had experienced teenage drinking in parks as a problem in their area were significantly more likely to agree with all six options, and those who or public drunkenness in their area were significantly likely to agree with five of these evidence-based measures. For those who had experienced alcohol related violence, four of these were significant, and for adults drinking in a public place or drink driving as problems in their area, there was significantly higher agreement for three of these evidence-based policy measures.

For the adult sample, those who had experienced public drunkenness in their area were significantly more likely to agree with all six evidence-based policy options, for those who had experienced alcohol related violence, they were more likely to agree with five evidence-based policy options. For those who had experienced underage drinking as a problem in their area, they were more likely to endorse four of these, including the two policy measures related to young people. Those who had experienced teenagers drinking, adults drinking, or drink driving as a problem in their area were more likely to agree with only two of the evidence-based policy options.

Conclusions
There is strong evidence that the views on alcohol policy in Donegal differ from those elsewhere in Ireland, with broadly lower support for evidence-based alcohol policy measures than in other counties where similar surveys have been conducted.

There were also some differences in views on alcohol policy between students and the general adult sample, and between those who drink hazardously (at risk of harm or currently experiencing harm) and those who do not drink hazardously.

Given the level of alcohol use and alcohol harm in Ireland, and particularly given changes since COVID-19, a one size fits all policy approach is unlikely to be suitable to meet the needs of those across the Island of Ireland.

It is recommended that key policy, health, and community stakeholders in the North-West region are involved in a discussion of the findings and decide the next steps to reduce alcohol consumption and alcohol related harm.

Funder: ICAAN/Alcohol Forum 

For further information about the dataset, please consult the readme file.

本数据集为《多尼戈尔郡饮酒行为与对循证酒精政策的态度：来自学生与普通成人样本的研究结果》（学生数据）数据集1。请注意存在与该相关研究论文关联的第二份数据集。

已发表报告的执行摘要：
爱尔兰于2018年通过《公共卫生（酒精）法案》（Public Health (Alcohol) Act 2018），作为旨在减少酒精消费及相关危害的立法框架。该法案要求爱尔兰调整酒精政策，包括定价、促销、广告、许可、可及性以及保护青少年等方面的改革。本研究旨在了解多尼戈尔郡民众对《公共卫生（酒精）法案》各项条款的支持情况。

我们调研了两组多尼戈尔郡居民的看法：第一组为就读于莱特肯尼理工学院（现大西洋科技大学）的395名学生（2018/2019学年学生样本），第二组为通过电子邮件或Facebook广告招募的536名多尼戈尔郡常住成人（2019/2020学年普通成人样本）。

### 饮酒水平
• 58%的学生与53%的成人存在危险饮酒行为（即饮酒行为会使饮酒者面临健康风险，或已因饮酒遭受健康损害）。
• 46%的学生与36%的成人过去一年中每月至少有一次单次饮酒量达6杯及以上的情况。
• 23%-25%的受访者认为家中有人存在重度饮酒行为。
• 19%的受访者表示，过去一年中家中他人的饮酒行为对自身造成了负面影响。

### 公共卫生干预措施：谁应承担干预责任？
• 27%的学生与25%的成人认同"个人有足够能力保护自身免受酒精危害"这一观点；
• 58%的学生与53%的成人认同"公共卫生机构应介入以保护民众免受酒精相关危害"；
• 65%-70%的受访者认同"医疗从业者应询问患者的饮酒情况"；
• 39%-43%的受访者认为当地可获取成人酒精成瘾治疗服务（26%-32%的受访者认为当地可获取青少年相关服务）。

### 关于成人与青少年酒精可及性的看法
• 19%的学生与33%的成人认同"应减少酒精销售网点数量"；
• 21%的学生与37%的成人认同"应将酒精销售与食品或其他商品销售分离"；
• 80%的学生与86%的成人认同"不应向18岁以下人群出售酒精"；
• 64%的学生与69%的成人认同"允许15岁儿童在自家饮酒是不可接受的"；
• 34%的学生与38%的成人认同"允许16-17岁青少年在自家饮酒是不可接受的"。

### 针对成人的酒精营销看法
• 81%-82%的受访者认同"酒精广告应明确标注饮酒风险"。
学生对酒精广告投放限制的支持率：
• 赞助体育队伍（40%）；体育场馆（40%）；公共交通（38%）；音乐活动（17%）。
成人对酒精广告投放限制的支持率：
• 赞助体育队伍（58%）；体育场馆（61%）；公共交通（33%）；音乐活动（53%）。

### 针对青少年的酒精营销看法
• 61%的学生与77%的成人认同"酒精电视广告仅应在晚9点后播出"；
• 59%的学生与86%的成人认同"应禁止针对青少年的酒精广告"；
• 80%的学生与82%的成人认同"酒精广告不应出现在学校或早教机构内或其周边"；
• 85%的学生与90%的成人认同"酒精供应商不应赞助儿童体育队伍"。

### 价格促销与最低单位定价
• 36%的学生与32%的成人认同"最低单位定价（minimum unit pricing）是一项利好政策"；
• 61%的学生与58%的成人认同"酒精价格促销会助长过度饮酒"；
• 19%的学生与33%的成人认同"应禁止酒吧、酒馆及俱乐部内的酒精价格促销活动"；
• 67%的学生与37%的成人认同"当酒精以折扣价销售时，自己更倾向于饮酒"。

### 基于当地感知特征的循证酒精政策支持情况
本次调研评估了六项循证政策选项的支持率，针对的是报告过酒精消费二手影响的受访者。这六项政策包括：针对青少年的酒精广告限制、向18岁以下人群售酒的禁令、禁止价格促销、减少酒精销售网点数量、支持酒精销售与其他商品分离，以及支持最低单位定价。

对于学生样本而言，经历过酒精消费二手影响的受访者对循证政策选项的支持度更高。认为"当地公园内青少年饮酒是一个问题"的学生，更显著地认同全部六项政策；而认为"当地存在公众醉酒现象"的学生，则更显著地认同其中五项循证干预措施。经历过酒精相关暴力事件的学生，更显著地认同其中四项政策；而认为"当地存在公共场所成人饮酒或酒后驾驶"问题的学生，则更显著地认同其中三项循证政策措施。

对于成人样本而言，认为"当地存在公众醉酒现象"的受访者，更显著地认同全部六项循证政策选项；经历过酒精相关暴力事件的成人，更显著地认同其中五项循证政策选项。认为"当地存在未成年人饮酒问题"的成人，更显著地支持其中四项政策，其中包括两项与青少年相关的政策措施。而认为"当地存在青少年饮酒、成人饮酒或酒后驾驶"问题的成人，则仅更显著地认同其中两项循证政策选项。

### 结论
现有充分证据表明，多尼戈尔郡民众对酒精政策的看法与爱尔兰其他地区存在差异，其对循证酒精政策措施的整体支持率低于其他开展过同类调研的郡。

学生样本与普通成人样本之间，以及危险饮酒者（面临饮酒健康风险或已因饮酒遭受损害）与非危险饮酒者之间，在酒精政策看法上也存在一定差异。

鉴于爱尔兰国内的酒精消费与酒精危害现状，尤其是新冠疫情以来的变化，"一刀切"的政策方案不太可能满足爱尔兰全岛各地民众的需求。

建议西北郡的核心政策制定者、卫生与社区利益相关方参与本次调研结果的研讨，并制定下一步措施以减少酒精消费及酒精相关危害。

资助方：ICAAN/酒精论坛（Alcohol Forum）

如需了解该数据集的更多信息，请参阅自述文件。