ArticleAtencion primaria2012
[Impact of the smoke-free legislation on the prevalence and referred time exposure to the environmental tobacco smoke in Zaragoza].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessment of exposure to secondhand tobacco smoke in Spain: A scoping review.Tobacco induced diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the impact of the Law 42/2010, on the health measures on smoking, on the prevalence of the exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS), the repercussions in frequently visited places, and support of the new legislation.
designA before-after evaluation by comparing two cross-sectional studies the comparison of two transverse surveys. PLACE: Primary Care, Delicias district (115,446 inhabitants) of Zaragoza city, including the Delicias Sur, Delicias Norte, Bombarda and Univérsitas basic health districts.
participantsA total of 387 users in 2009, and 400 in 2011 with ages between 20 and 79 years old assigned to the participating Primary Care Centres. MAIN MEASUREMENTS: Prevalences and mean exposure times, with their confidence intervals (CI). The differences were then calculated using the Chi-squared test and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA).
resultsThe exposure prevalence to the ETS in 2011 was shown to be lower and statistically significant than that found before the implementation of the new legislative measure, falling from the 61.9% to the 40.5% (CI 95%=35.8-45.4%), with 61.5% of those polled being in favour of the new law (CI 95%=59.2-68.75), and 80.5% (79,08-86.44) mentioned still going to the same places with the same frequency.
conclusionsThe impact has been favourable, decreasing the exposure by more than 20%, with this fall being more marked in the population that currently define themselves as non-smokers. There is population support for the new legislation. Finally, there has been no observed fall in the frequency of visits to the same places.
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.