Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23136269›Full record

ArticleNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2013

Individual, social, and environmental factors associated with support for smoke-free housing policies among subsidized multiunit housing tenants.

Nancy E Hood, Amy K Ferketich, Elizabeth G Klein, Mary Ellen Wewers, Phyllis Pirie

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05016505 (A Randomized Controlled Trial to Support Smoke-Free Policy Compliance in Public Housing), which is not on this map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT05016505 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

A Randomized Controlled Trial to Support Smoke-Free Policy Compliance in Public Housing

TypeinterventionalSponsorColumbia UniversityRan2022 to 2025Enrolled405ConditionsSmoking, Smoking Cessation, Smoking Reduction, Smoking BehaviorsArmsReduction (relocation and reduction of personal smoking) and cessation, Resident Endorsement
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Resident Support for the Federally Mandated Smoke-Free Rule in Public Housing: 2018-2022.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Attitudes towards Potential New Tobacco Control Regulations among U.S. Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

5 authors.

Nancy E HoodThe Ohio State University College of Public Health, Health Behavior & Health Promotion, Columbus, OH 48106-1248, USA. hoodnanc@umich.edu
Amy K Ferketich
Elizabeth G Klein
Mary Ellen Wewers
Phyllis Pirie

Funding

TRAINING AND CAREER DEVELOPMENTP50CA105632 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI WEGHORST, CHRISTOPHER M · 2003 to 2016
$17.2M
NCI NIH HHS P50CA105632
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMandatory smoke-free policies in subsidized, multiunit housing (MUH) may decrease secondhand smoke exposure in households with the highest rates of exposure. Ideally, policies should be based on a strong understanding of factors affecting support for smoke-free policies in the target population to maximize effectiveness.

methodsA face-to-face survey was conducted from August to October 2011 using a stratified random sample of private subsidized housing units in Columbus, OH, without an existing smoke-free policy (n = 301, 64% response rate). Lease holders were asked to report individual, social, and environmental factors hypothesized to be related to support for smoke-free policies. Multiple logistic regression models were used to identify factors independently associated with policy support.

resultsMost tenants supported smoke-free policies in common areas (82.7%), half supported policies inside units (54.5%), and one third supported a ban outside the building (36.3%). Support for smoke-free policies in units and outdoors was more common among nonsmokers than smokers (71.5% vs. 35.7%, p < .001 and 46.2% vs. 25.4%, p < .001, respectively). Several individual and social, but no environmental, factors were independently associated with policy support. Smokers who intended to quit within 6 months or less were more likely than other smokers to support in-unit policies (45.3% vs. 21.1%; p = .003).

conclusionsMore than half of subsidized MUH tenants supported smoke-free policies inside their units. Strategies to address individual- and social-level barriers to behavior change should be implemented in parallel with smoke-free policies. Policies should be evaluated with objective measures to determine their effectiveness.

Indexed as

HousingSmoking PreventionAdolescentAdultChildChild, PreschoolData CollectionDemographyFemaleHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansLogistic ModelsMaleOhioOrganizational PolicySmoke-Free PolicyTobacco Smoke Pollution

Identifiers

PMID23136269
PMCPMC3646651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.