Trial reportSocial science & medicine (1982)2008
A randomized trial evaluating tobacco possession-use-purchase laws in the USA.
Trial report in Social science & medicine (1982), 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- A community prevention model to prevent children from inhaling and ingesting harmful legal products.Evaluation and program planning · 2012Trial
- Effects of youth tobacco access and possession policy interventions on heavy adolescent smokers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2009Trial
- Patterns, clusters, and transitions in U.S. state ENDS policy implementation: 2010-2020.PLOS global public health · 2024Article
- Tobacco 21 Laws and Youth Tobacco Use: The Role of Policy Attributes.American journal of public health · 2024Article
- Moving Beyond Policy Adoption-The Necessity of Understanding the Whys and Hows.American journal of public health · 2024Article
- Miscommunication about the US federal Tobacco 21 law: a content analysis of Twitter discussions.Tobacco control · 2023Article
- Exploration of the link between tobacco retailers in school neighborhoods and student smoking.The Journal of school health · 2013Article
- The impact of local U.S. tobacco policies on youth tobacco use: A critical review.Open journal of preventive medicine · 2011Article
- State-level tobacco control policies and youth smoking cessation measures.Health policy (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2010Article
- Cracking Down On Youth Tobacco May Influence Drug Use.Journal of community psychology · 2010Article
- Youth tobacco access and possession policy interventions: effects on observed and perceived tobacco use.The American journal on addictionsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Tobacco Purchase-Use-Possession laws (PUP) are being implemented throughout the US, but it is still unclear whether they are effective in reducing smoking prevalence among the youth targeted by these public health policies. In the present study, 24 towns in Northern Illinois were randomly assigned to one of two conditions. One condition involved reducing commercial sources of youth access to tobacco (Control), whereas the second involved both reducing commercial sources of youth access to tobacco as well as fining minors for possessing or using tobacco (Experimental). Students in 24 towns in Northern Illinois in the United States completed a 74 item self-report survey in 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005. At the start of the study, students were in grades 7-10. During each time period, students were classified as current smokers or nonsmokers (i.e., completely abstinent for the 30 consecutive days prior to assessment). The analyses included 25,404 different students and 50,725 assessments over the four time periods. A hierarchical linear modeling analytical approach was selected due to the multilevel data (i.e., town-level variables and individual-level variables), and nested design of sampling of youth within towns. Findings indicated that the rates of current smoking were not significantly different between the two conditions at baseline, but over time, rates increased significantly less quickly for adolescents in Experimental than those in Control towns. The implications of these findings are discussed.
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.