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