Skip to main content

Table 13 “Plausible case” scenario for sensitivity analysis

From: Obesity-related health impacts of fuel excise taxation- an evidence review and cost-effectiveness study

Parameters for ‘plausible case’ scenario analysis

Mean values and 95% UIa (where applicable)

Sources and assumptions

Intervention effect

Cross price elasticity for public transport with respect to fuel price

0.37

(95% UI -0.24-0.97)

Sampled from a normal distribution, taken from mean cross price elasticity as reported by Holmgren 2007 [78]. Derived increase in the prevalence of PT commuting of 3.3% [38]. Modelled to PA/BMI effect. Assumed all new public transport users were previous car drivers, a reasonable assumption given the high prevalence of driving to work in Australia [38].

Average annual retail fuel price (national, metropolitan) (cents per litre)

125.39

(95% UI 124.95–125.83)

Sampled from a gamma distribution, from national metropolitan fuel price [102]. As per primary analysis.

Prevalence of using public transport for commuting purposes

Males

18y-4.5%

19y-5.8%

20-24y-8.5%

25-29y-11.7%

30-34y-11.1%

35-39y-9.1%

40-44y-7.4%

45-49y-6.3%

50-54y-5.8%

55-59y-4.9%

60-64y-3.3%

Females

18y-6.9%

19y-8%

20-24y-11.1%

25-29y-13.1%

30-34y-9.9%

35-39y-6.8%

40-44y-5.9%

45-49y-5.7%

50-54y-5.3%

55-59y-4.5%

60-64y-2.9%

ABS Census 2011 [38]. As per primary analysis.

Marginal MET value for walking to access public transport

3

MET value for walking to work or class of 4 from Ainsworth et al. 2011 [81], adjusted for inactivity. Sampled using a lognormal distribution (stdev 1.6 from Gotschi et al. 2015 [103]).

Average distance a person will walk to access public transport (metres)

800

Based on ‘rule of thumb’ planning guideline for distance walked to bus/tram access points.

Comfortable gait speed (cm/s)

As per primary analysis.

Number of weeks of intervention effect (averaged over year)

As per primary analysis