ArticleBMC public health2005
Gender and age differences among current smokers in a general population survey.
Article in BMC public health, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex-based differences in histologic lung cancer incidence trends in the United States, 2005-2019.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Article
- Smoking Habits and Nicotine Dependence Among the General Lebanese Population Before and During Both the Economic Crisis and COVID-19 Pandemic.Tobacco use insights · 2024Article
- Outdoor smoking in Nigeria: prevalence, correlates and predictors.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Focus points in prevention actions against legal substances' abuse.Wiener klinische Wochenschrift · 2015Article
- Lifetime exposure to cigarette smoking and the development of adult-onset atopic dermatitis.The British journal of dermatology · 2011Article
- Sedative, hypnotic, anxiolytic and opioid medicament use and its co-occurrence with tobacco smoking and alcohol risk drinking in a community sample.BMC public health · 2007Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEvidence suggests a higher proportion of current smokers among female than among male ever smokers at the age above 50. However, little is known about the proportion of current smokers among ever smokers in old age groups with consideration of women in comparison to men from general population samples. The goal was to analyze the proportions of current smokers among female and among male ever smokers including those older than 80.
methodsCross-sectional survey study with a national probability household sample in Germany. Data of 179,472 participants aged 10 or older were used based on face-to-face in-home interviews or questionnaires. The proportions of current smokers among ever smokers were analyzed dependent on age, age of onset of smoking and cigarettes per day including effect modification by gender.
resultsProportions of current smokers tended to be larger among female than among male ever smokers aged 40 or above. Women compared to men showed adjusted odds ratios of 1.7 to 6.9 at ages 40 to 90 or older in contrast to men. No such interaction existed for age of onset of smoking or cigarettes per day.
conclusionSpecial emphasis should be given to current smokers among the female general population at the age of 40 or above in public health intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.