Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23968612›Full record

ArticleHealthcare policy = Politiques de sante2012

Disproportionate organizational injustice: a close look at facilities exempted from indoor smoking laws in Canada.

Mohammed Al-Hamdani

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Healthcare policy = Politiques de sante, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 86% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mohammed Al-HamdaniDepartment of Psychology, Saint Mary’s University, 923, Robie Street, Halifax, NS. alhamdani.mohammed@gmail.com
Saint Mary's University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Federal and provincial legislation bans smoking in indoor public spaces and workplaces, yet exemptions exist for residential facilities such as nursing homes and addiction treatment centres. In relying on ventilated smoking rooms, however, these organizations are failing to protect the health of their employees and clients. Increased use of risk messages regarding the harms of second- and third-hand smoke, together with enhanced nicotine replacement therapies for smokers, would rectify this disproportionate injustice. Such an approach must also recognize and counteract the efforts of the tobacco industry to block total indoor smoking bans.

Indexed as

CanadaHumansOccupational ExposureOccupational HealthResidential FacilitiesSmoke-Free PolicySmokingSocial JusticeTobacco Smoke PollutionWorkforceTobacco Smoke Pollution

Identifiers

PMID23968612
PMCPMC3517869
OpenAlexW2081633150

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.