ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2015
Tobacco Use and Exposure to Second-Hand Smoke among Urban Residents: A Community-Based Investigation.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevalence of passive smoking in the community population aged 15 years and older in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMJ open · 2016Pooled it
- Academic Performance and Peer or Parental Tobacco Use among Non-Smoking Adolescents: Influence of Smoking Interactions on Intention to Smoke.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Lung cancer occurrence attributable to passive smoking among never smokers in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational lung cancer research · 2020Article
- Individual and city-level determinants of secondhand smoke exposure in China.International journal of health geographics · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn 2005, China acceded to the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (WHO FCTC), the foundation for the global fight against tobacco. Certain cities in China have established local regulations to control tobacco use ahead of national policy; however, without the enforcement of statutory law, some of these regulations are merely lip service. The aim of the study was to assess the effects of city policy on smoking prevalence and on second-hand smoke (SHS) exposure status among non-smokers in Changchun City.
methodsA cross-sectional survey covering a multiple-stage, representative sample of the urban population aged ≥15 years was conducted between 1 Dec 2013 and 31 Jan 2014. The WHO and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed the questionnaires used, which included demographic characteristics, smoking behaviors and SHS exposure status.
resultsOverall cigarette smoking prevalence was 23.5%; daily cigarette smoking prevalence was 21.2%. Smoking prevalence and cigarettes consumed per day was higher among men (p < 0.05) and those aged 45-64 years (p < 0.05). Among current smokers, 8.1% planned to quit within 12 months; 53.4% had no intention of quitting. Overall SHS exposure prevalence was 41.9% (workplace) and 34.1% (at home) over the previous 30 days. The weighted workplace SHS exposure prevalence increased with age.
conclusionsThe high proportion of smokers with no intention of quitting and the high level of SHS exposure may constitute one of the most significant barriers to successful smoking cessation in the city. A continued drive to promote full implementation of the WHO FCTC is still needed.
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.