ArticleJournal of American college health : J of ACH2015
Evaluating California campus tobacco policies using the American College Health Association guidelines and the Institutional Grammar Tool.
Article in Journal of American college health : J of ACH, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Navigating Threats of Wildfires and Individual Rights to Adopt 100% Tobacco-Free Policy in Rural California Community Colleges.Journal of community health · 2024Article
- Non-compliance with university tobacco-free policies: A qualitative exploration.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2022Article
- Campus tobacco control policies and cessation interventions in college students: a commentary calling for research and action to address tobacco-related health disparities.Translational behavioral medicine · 2021Article
- The carrot and the stick? Strategies to improve compliance with college campus tobacco policies.Journal of American college health : J of ACHArticle
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
Abstract
objectiveTo measure comprehensiveness of California campus tobacco policies.
participantsSixteen campuses representing different regions, institution types, and policies. Research occurred June-August 2013.
methodsComprehensiveness was scored using American College Health Association's (ACHA) Position Statement on Tobacco. The Institutional Grammar Tool was used to breakdown policy statements into Strategies, Norms, or Rules. Differences in ACHA score and number of Strategies, Norms, and Rules were assessed by region, policy, and institution type.
resultsMedian ACHA score was 0.35 (scale of 0-1). Schools with 100% tobacco-free policies had highest ACHA scores, but failed to address relationships between schools and tobacco companies. Less than half the schools assessed (7/16) had Rules (enforceable penalties related to policies). In 67% of the policy statements, individuals doing the action were implied (not specifically stated).
conclusionCampuses should address ACHA recommendations related to campus relationships with tobacco companies, include enforceable rules, and specify individuals and entities covered by policy.
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.