ArticleNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2015
Full and home smoking ban adoption after a randomized controlled trial targeting secondhand smoke exposure reduction.
Article in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Family and carer smoking control programmes for reducing children's exposure to environmental tobacco smoke.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Trial
- Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Early Language Difficulties among U.S. Children.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- The effects of community participation program on smoke-free homes in a suburban community of Thailand.Tobacco induced diseases · 2021Article
- Smoke-Free Rules in Homes and Cars Among Smokers and Nonsmokers in Minnesota.Preventing chronic disease · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe current study examined home and full (i.e., home plus car) smoking ban adoption as secondary outcomes to a randomized controlled trial targeting reduced secondhand smoke exposure (SHSe) for children under treatment for cancer.
methodsFamilies with at least 1 adult smoker who reported SHSe for their children (n = 119) were randomized to control or intervention conditions and followed for 1 year with 5 assessments. Both groups were advised of the negative health outcomes associated with SHSe; the intervention group provided more in-depth counseling from baseline to 3 months. Parents reported on household and car smoking behavior, demographic, psychosocial, and medical/treatment-related information.
resultsRegardless of group assignment, there was an increase in home (odds ration [OR] = 1.16, p = .074) and full (OR = 1.37, p = .001) smoking ban adoption across time. Families in the intervention group were more likely to adopt a full ban by 3 months, but this difference was nonsignificant by 12 months. Married parents (OR = 2.33, p = .006) and those with higher self-efficacy for controlling children's SHSe (OR = 1.11, p = .023) were more likely to have a home smoking ban; parents who reported smoking fewer cigarettes were more likely to adopt a home (OR = 1.62, p < .0001) or full (OR = 7.32, p = .038) ban.
conclusionsSmoking bans are in-line with Healthy People 2020's tobacco objectives and may be more feasible for parents with medically compromised children for immediate SHSe reduction. Furthermore, interventions targeting full smoking bans may be a more effective for comprehensive elimination of SHSe.
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.