Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25391278›Full record

ArticleJournal of dual diagnosis2014

Online comments on smoking bans in psychiatric hospitals units.

Cati G Brown-Johnson, Ashley Sanders-Jackson, Judith J Prochaska

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of dual diagnosis, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Smoking, Mental Illness, and Public Health.Annual review of public health · 2017
    Review
  8. Stigmatic and Sympathetic Attitudes Toward Cancer Patients Who Smoke: A Qualitative Analysis of an Online Discussion Board Forum.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2016
    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

3 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Cati G Brown-Johnson
Ashley Sanders-Jackson
Judith J Prochaska
Stanford University · US

Funding

TREATMENTS FOR COMPLEX PATIENTS IN NEW SETTINGSP50DA009253 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI MEYERHOFF, DIETER J · 1994 to 2014
$28.2M
CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE PREVENTION TRAINING PROGRAMT32HL007034 · NHLBI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI GARDNER, CHRISTOPHER D · 1985 to 2020
$8.7M
Postdoctoral training in tobacco controlR25CA113710 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GLANTZ, STANTON ARNOLD · 2006 to 2015
$5.4M
Postdoctoral training in tobacco controlT32CA113710 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LING, PAMELA MAY · 2016 to 2020
$2.6M
Evaluation of Tobacco Treatment Strategies for Inpatient PsychiatryR01MH083684 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI PROCHASKA, JUDITH J. · 2009 to 2013
$2.6M
NCI NIH HHS CA-113710NCI NIH HHS R25 CA113710NCI NIH HHS T32 CA113710NHLBI NIH HHS 5T32 HL007034-39NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007034NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA009253NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA09253NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH083684
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveIndividuals with mental health concerns are disproportionately affected by and suffer the negative consequences of tobacco use disorder, perhaps because smoking has historically been part of psychiatry's culture. In the early 1990s, psychiatric inpatient facilities were exempted from U.S. hospital smoking bans, in response to public outcry with national media attention. Almost 2 decades later, the current study characterizes online conversation about psychiatric hospital smoking bans. Previous commenting studies have demonstrated commenting's negativity, documenting the "nasty effect" wherein negative comments color perceptions of neutral articles. Thus, we focused particular attention on cited barriers to implementing health-positive smoke-free policies.

methodsWe collected online comments (N = 261) responding to popular media articles on smoking bans in inpatient psychiatry between 2013 and 2014 and conducted an inductive and exploratory qualitative content analysis.

resultsVerifying previous studies documenting the prevalence of negative commenting, of the comments explicitly supporting or refuting psychiatry smoking bans, there were over twice as many con comments (n = 44) than pro (n = 18). Many commenters argued for access to outdoor smoking areas and warned of patient agitation and risk posed to care workers. Identified content themes included psychiatric medication and negative side effects, broken mental health systems and institutions, denigration of the health risks of tobacco in the context of mental illness, typical pro-smoking arguments about "smokers' rights" and alternatives (including e-cigarettes), addiction, and stigma.

conclusionsThe current findings provide a platform to begin to understand how people talk about mental health issues and smoking. Our analysis also raised complex issues concerning forces that impact U.S. patients with serious mental illness but over which they have little control, including medication, the U.S. health system, stigma, perceptions that life with chronic serious mental illness is not worth living, and psychological and physical pain of coping with mental illness. In consideration of identified barriers raised in opposition to smoking bans in inpatient psychiatry, efforts should emphasize patient stakeholder involvement; patient, visitor, and staff protection from smoke exposure; the effectiveness of nicotine replacement for managing withdrawal; and the lack of evidence that cigarettes are therapeutic.

Indexed as

CommunicationHospitals, PsychiatricInternetSmoke-Free PolicyHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeHumansMental DisordersPatient RightsPsychotropic DrugsSmokingSmoking PreventionTobacco Smoke PollutionUnited StatesPsychotropic DrugsTobacco Smoke Pollutionpsychiatric inpatientschizophreniasmoking banstigma

Identifiers

PMID25391278
PMCPMC4408924
OpenAlexW2088007359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.