ReviewTobacco control2013
Potential advantages and disadvantages of an endgame strategy: a 'sinking lid' on tobacco supply.
Review in Tobacco control, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Lebanese Regie state-owned tobacco monopoly: lessons to inform monopoly-focused endgame strategies.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Support for e-cigarette policies among smokers in seven European countries: longitudinal findings from the 2016-18 EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys.European journal of public health · 2020Article
- Anti-tobacco control industry strategies in Turkey.BMC public health · 2018Article
- Changing ethnic inequalities in mortality in New Zealand over 30 years: linked cohort studies with 68.9 million person-years of follow-up.Population health metrics · 2017Article
- The tobacco endgame: a qualitative review and synthesis.Tobacco control · 2016Review
- The tobacco endgame: is it possible?PLoS medicine · 2015Article
- An endgame for tobacco?Tobacco control · 2013Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundOne possible supply-side strategy for the tobacco endgame is a government-mandated 'sinking lid' on tobacco supply (tradeable but decreasing quotas on sales or imports).
methodsWe considered literature on quota systems and from a tobacco endgame workshop at the University of Michigan.
findingsLikely strengths of the sinking lid strategy include: (1) that it can provide a clear timetable and an unambiguous signal of a tobacco end-date; (2) that supply reduction is likely to increase product price levels, and there is very strong evidence that increasing price is a highly effective tobacco control intervention. Its feasibility is also supported by the growing international experience with, and political acceptability of, using quota and auction systems in other domains (eg, greenhouse gases, other air pollutants and for fisheries). However, the main disadvantages of this strategy are probably the need for strong political will and high public support (to pass a new law), potential legal challenges by industry (eg, under trade agreements), and vulnerability to problems from illegal supplies of tobacco and from corruption.
conclusionsThe sinking lid strategy is a plausible option that is worth considering when investigating possible tobacco endgame strategies, though it may be most applicable in well-organised jurisdictions with low (<15%) adult smoking prevalence. This idea could benefit from further research, such as studies in virtual worlds, and real-world testing on small island jurisdictions, or closed systems, such as military bases.
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.