SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2016
Legislative smoking bans for reducing harms from secondhand smoke exposure, smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 203 papers, 17 of them syntheses 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
203 citing papers in PubMed, 17 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 657 citations in OpenAlex.
- Association between life satisfaction and health behaviours among older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.The international journal of behavioral nutrition and physical activity · 2026Pooled it
- Post-policy evaluation lags of tobacco and nicotine product policies: a systematic review from the United States, Canada, Australia, and the United Kingdom.Frontiers in public health · 2026Pooled it
- Determining optimal strategies for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: a synopsis of an evidence synthesis study.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2025 · on this mapPooled it
- A systematic review and network meta-analysis of population-level interventions to tackle smoking behaviour.Nature human behaviour · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluation of Population-Level Tobacco Control Interventions and Health Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.JAMA network open · 2023Pooled it
- Global, regional, and national burden of chronic respiratory diseases and associated risk factors, 1990-2019: Results from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2019.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Pooled it
- The efficacy of smoking ban policy at the workplace on secondhand smoking: systematic review and meta-analysis.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2020Pooled it
- Interventions during pregnancy to prevent preterm birth: an overview of Cochrane systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- The effects of public health policies on health inequalities in high-income countries: an umbrella review.BMC public health · 2018Pooled it
- Signs, Fines and Compliance Officers: A Systematic Review of Strategies for Enforcing Smoke-Free Policy.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Pooled it
- Impact of public smoking bans on children's exposure to tobacco smoke at home: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC public health · 2018Pooled it
- Tobacco cessation interventions for young people.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Evidence for a comprehensive approach to Aboriginal tobacco control to maintain the decline in smoking: an overview of reviews among Indigenous peoples.Systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Psychosocial interventions for supporting women to stop smoking in pregnancy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Smokefree legislation effects on respiratory and sensory disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.PloS one · 2017Pooled it
- Facilitators and Barriers of Smokers' Compliance with Smoking Bans in Public Places: A Systematic Review of Quantitative and Qualitative Literature.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016Pooled it
- Impact of institutional smoking bans on reducing harms and secondhand smoke exposure.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Effectiveness of the spirometry-based motivational intervention to quit smoking: RESET randomised trial.The European journal of general practice · 2023Trial
- Particle Exposure Hazards of Visiting Outdoor Smoking Areas for Patients with Asthma or COPD Even in EU Countries with Comprehensive Smokefree Laws.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Trial
- Mobile-health intervention for smoking cessation among Cambodian people living with HIV: A mixed-methods pilot study.AIDS care · 2022Trial
143 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSmoking bans have been implemented in a variety of settings, as well as being part of policy in many jurisdictions to protect the public and employees from the harmful effects of secondhand smoke (SHS). They also offer the potential to influence social norms and the smoking behaviour of those populations they affect. Since the first version of this review in 2010, more countries have introduced national smoking legislation banning indoor smoking.
objectivesTo assess the effects of legislative smoking bans on (1) morbidity and mortality from exposure to secondhand smoke, and (2) smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and reference lists of included studies. We also checked websites of various organisations. Date of most recent search; February 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered studies that reported legislative smoking bans affecting populations. The minimum standard was having an indoor smoking ban explicitly in the study and a minimum of six months follow-up for measures of smoking behaviour. Our search included a broad range of research designs including: randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies (i.e. non-randomized controlled studies), controlled before-and-after studies, interrupted time series as defined by the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group, and uncontrolled pre- and post-ban data. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: One author extracted characteristics and content of the interventions, participants, outcomes and methods of the included studies and a second author checked the details. We extracted health and smoking behaviour outcomes. We did not attempt a meta-analysis due to the heterogeneity in design and content of the studies included. We evaluated the studies using qualitative narrative synthesis. MAIN
resultsThere are 77 studies included in this updated review. We retained 12 studies from the original review and identified 65 new studies. Evidence from 21 countries is provided in this update, an increase of eight countries from the original review. The nature of the intervention precludes randomized controlled trials. Thirty-six studies used an interrupted time series study design, 23 studies use a controlled before-and-after design and 18 studies are before-and-after studies with no control group; six of these studies use a cohort design. Seventy-two studies reported health outcomes, including cardiovascular (44), respiratory (21), and perinatal outcomes (7). Eleven studies reported national mortality rates for smoking-related diseases. A number of the studies report multiple health outcomes. There is consistent evidence of a positive impact of national smoking bans on improving cardiovascular health outcomes, and reducing mortality for associated smoking-related illnesses. Effects on respiratory and perinatal health were less consistent. We found 24 studies evaluating the impact of national smoke-free legislation on smoking behaviour. Evidence of an impact of legislative bans on smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption is inconsistent, with some studies not detecting additional long-term change in existing trends in prevalence. AUTHORS'
conclusionsSince the first version of this review was published, the current evidence provides more robust support for the previous conclusions that the introduction of a legislative smoking ban does lead to improved health outcomes through reduction in SHS for countries and their populations. The clearest evidence is observed in reduced admissions for acute coronary syndrome. There is evidence of reduced mortality from smoking-related illnesses at a national level. There is inconsistent evidence of an impact on respiratory and perinatal health outcomes, and on smoking prevalence and tobacco consumption.
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.