Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22870289›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Exposure to secondhand smoke in terraces and other outdoor areas of hospitality venues in eight European countries.

Maria J López, Esteve Fernández, Giuseppe Gorini, Hanns Moshammer, Kinga Polanska, Luke Clancy, Bertrand Dautzenberg, Agnes Delrieu, Giovanni Invernizzi, Glòria Muñoz and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Exposure to Secondhand Tobacco Smoke at Airport Terminals.Journal of environmental and public health · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Monitoring an outdoor smoking area by means of PMEnvironmental science and pollution research international · 2016
    Article
  17. National and State-Specific Attitudes toward Smoke-Free Parks among U.S. Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Maria J LópezPublic Health Agency of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain. mjlopez@aspb.cat
Esteve Fernández
Giuseppe Gorini
Hanns Moshammer
Kinga Polanska
Luke Clancy
Bertrand Dautzenberg
Agnes Delrieu
Giovanni Invernizzi
Glòria Muñoz
Jose Precioso
Ario Ruprecht
Peter Stansty
Wojciech Hanke
Manel Nebot

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOutdoor secondhand smoke (SHS) concentrations are usually lower than indoor concentrations, yet some studies have shown that outdoor SHS levels could be comparable to indoor levels under specific conditions. The main objectives of this study were to assess levels of SHS exposure in terraces and other outdoor areas of hospitality venues and to evaluate their potential displacement to adjacent indoor areas.

methodsNicotine and respirable particles (PM2.5) were measured in outdoor and indoor areas of hospitality venues of 8 European countries. Hospitality venues of the study included night bars, restaurants and bars. The fieldwork was carried out between March 2009 and March 2011.

resultsWe gathered 170 nicotine and 142 PM2.5 measurements during the study. The median indoor SHS concentration was significantly higher in venues where smoking was allowed (nicotine 3.69 µg/m3, PM2.5: 120.51 µg/m3) than in those where smoking was banned (nicotine: 0.48 µg/m3, PM2.5: 36.90 µg/m3). The median outdoor nicotine concentration was higher in places where indoor smoking was banned (1.56 µg/m3) than in venues where smoking was allowed (0.31 µg/m3). Among the different types of outdoor areas, the highest median outdoor SHS levels (nicotine: 4.23 µg/m3, PM2.5: 43.64 µg/m3) were found in the semi-closed outdoor areas of venues where indoor smoking was banned.

conclusionsBanning indoor smoking seems to displace SHS exposure to adjacent outdoor areas. Furthermore, indoor settings where smoking is banned but which have a semi-closed outdoor area have higher levels of SHS than those with open outdoor areas, possibly indicating that SHS also drifts from outdoors to indoors. Current legislation restricting indoor SHS levels seems to be insufficient to protect hospitality workers--and patrons--from SHS exposure. Tobacco-free legislation should take these results into account and consider restrictions in the terraces of some hospitality venues to ensure effective protection.

Indexed as

AirAir Pollution, IndoorEuropean UnionHumansNicotineTobacco Smoke PollutionNicotineTobacco Smoke Pollution

Identifiers

PMID22870289
PMCPMC3411634

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.