Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12142305›Full record

SynthesisBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2002

Effect of smoke-free workplaces on smoking behaviour: systematic review.

Caroline M Fichtenberg, Stanton A Glantz

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 413 papers, 11 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
413citing papers in PubMed, 11 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

413 citing papers in PubMed, 11 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. A Proactive Smoking Cessation Intervention for Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Smokers: The Role of Smoking-Related Stigma.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2018
    Trial
  18. Trial
  19. Using ecological measures of smoking trigger exposure to predict smoking cessation milestones.Psychology of addictive behaviors : journal of the Society of Psychologists in Addictive Behaviors · 2015
    Trial
  20. Article

353 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Caroline M FichtenbergCenter for Tobacco Control Research and Education, Institute for Health Policy Studies, Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143, USA.
Stanton A Glantz

Funding

TOBACCO ADVOCACY AT THE STATE LEVELR01CA061021 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GLANTZ, STANTON ARNOLD · 1994 to 2015
$7.4M
NCI NIH HHS CA-61021NCI NIH HHS R01 CA061021
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo quantify the effects of smoke-free workplaces on smoking in employees and compare these effects to those achieved through tax increases.

designSystematic review with a random effects meta-analysis. STUDY SELECTION: 26 studies on the effects of smoke-free workplaces.

settingWorkplaces in the United States, Australia, Canada, and Germany.

participantsEmployees in unrestricted and totally smoke-free workplaces.

main outcome measuresDaily cigarette consumption (per smoker and per employee) and smoking prevalence.

resultsTotally smoke-free workplaces are associated with reductions in prevalence of smoking of 3.8% (95% confidence interval 2.8% to 4.7%) and 3.1 (2.4 to 3.8) fewer cigarettes smoked per day per continuing smoker. Combination of the effects of reduced prevalence and lower consumption per continuing smoker yields a mean reduction of 1.3 cigarettes per day per employee, which corresponds to a relative reduction of 29%. To achieve similar reductions the tax on a pack of cigarettes would have to increase from $0.76 to $3.05 (0.78 euro to 3.14 euro) in the United States and from 3.44 pounds sterling to 6.59 pounds sterling (5.32 euro to 10.20 euro) in the United Kingdom. If all workplaces became smoke-free, consumption per capita in the entire population would drop by 4.5% in the United States and 7.6% in the United Kingdom, costing the tobacco industry $1.7 billion and 310 million pounds sterling annually in lost sales. To achieve similar reductions tax per pack would have to increase to $1.11 and 4.26 pounds sterling.

conclusionsSmoke-free workplaces not only protect non-smokers from the dangers of passive smoking, they also encourage smokers to quit or to reduce consumption.

Indexed as

Occupational HealthSmoking PreventionAdolescentHumansSmokingSmoking CessationTobacco Smoke PollutionWorkplaceTobacco Smoke Pollution

Identifiers

PMID12142305
PMCPMC117445

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.