Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23805265›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Evaluating the Effectiveness of France's Indoor Smoke-Free Law 1 Year and 5 Years after Implementation: Findings from the ITC France Survey.

Geoffrey T Fong, Lorraine V Craig, Romain Guignard, Gera E Nagelhout, Megan K Tait, Pete Driezen, Ryan David Kennedy, Christian Boudreau, Jean-Louis Wilquin, Antoine Deutsch and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Secondhand Smoke Exposure in European Countries With Different Smoke-Free Legislation: Findings From the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Observational
  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

11 authors.

Geoffrey T FongDepartment of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada ; School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada ; Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Lorraine V Craig
Romain Guignard
Gera E Nagelhout
Megan K Tait
Pete Driezen
Ryan David Kennedy
Christian Boudreau
Jean-Louis Wilquin
Antoine Deutsch
François Beck

Funding

Variation in Cigarettes, Tobacco use Behaviors and Exposures in ITC CountriesP01CA138389 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI THOMPSON, MARY · 2009 to 2013
$13.4M
CIHR 115216CIHR 79551NCI NIH HHS P01 CA138389
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

France implemented a comprehensive smoke-free law in two phases: Phase 1 (February 2007) banned smoking in workplaces, shopping centres, airports, train stations, hospitals, and schools; Phase 2 (January 2008) banned smoking in hospitality venues (bars, restaurants, hotels, casinos, nightclubs). This paper evaluates France's smoke-free law based on the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project in France (the ITC France Project), which conducted a cohort survey of approximately 1,500 smokers and 500 non-smokers before the implementation of the laws (Wave 1) and two waves after the implementation (Waves 2 and 3). Results show that the smoke-free law led to a very significant and near-total elimination of observed smoking in key venues such as bars (from 94-97% to 4%) and restaurants (from 60-71% to 2-3%) at Wave 2, which was sustained four years later (6-8% in bars; 1-2% in restaurants). The reduction in self-reported smoking by smoking respondents was nearly identical to the effects shown in observed smoking. Observed smoking in workplaces declined significantly after the law (from 41-48% to 18-20%), which continued to decline at Wave 3 (to 14-15%). Support for the smoke-free laws increased significantly after their implementation and continued to increase at Wave 3 (p<.001 among smokers for bars and restaurants; p<.001 among smokers and p = .003 for non-smokers for workplaces). The findings demonstrate that smoke-free policies that are implemented in ways consistent with the Guidelines for Article 8 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC) lead to substantial and sustained reductions in indoor smoking while also leading to high levels of support by the public. Moreover, contrary to arguments by opponents of smoke-free laws, smoking in the home did not increase after the law was implemented and prevalence of smoke-free homes among smokers increased from 23.2% before the law to 37.2% 5 years after the law.

Indexed as

Program EvaluationAdolescentAdultBehaviorFranceHumansInterviews as TopicSmoke-Free PolicySmokingSurveys and QuestionnairesTelephoneYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID23805265
PMCPMC3689708

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.