Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28522236›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2017

Parental Support for Age-based Indoor Tanning Restrictions.

Melissa B Gilkey, Darren Mays, Maryam M Asgari, Melanie L Kornides, Annie-Laurie McRee

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Melissa B GilkeyDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts. Electronic address: melissa_gilkey@hphc.org.
Darren MaysDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, District of Columbia; Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, District of Columbia.
Maryam M AsgariDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts; Department of Dermatology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts.
Melanie L KornidesDepartment of Population Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Harvard Pilgrim Health Care Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Annie-Laurie McReeDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Harvard Pilgrim Health Care · USGeorgetown University Medical Center · USHarvard University · USUniversity of Minnesota · US

Funding

Patient-oriented research and mentoring program in dermatologic diseasesK24AR069760 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO DENVER · PI ASGARI, MARYAM MANDANA · 2017 to 2025
$1.9M
NSAID use in Chemoprevention of Squamous Cell CarcinomasK23AR051037 · NIAMS · KAISER FOUNDATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE · PI ASGARI, MARYAM MANDANA · 2005 to 2009
$659k
Improving Healthcare Providers' Communication about HPV VaccineK22CA186979 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI GILKEY, MELISSA B · 2014 to 2016
$553k
NCI NIH HHS K22 CA186979NIAMS NIH HHS K23 AR051037NIAMS NIH HHS K24 AR069760
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRegulatory agencies, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, are considering policies to ban indoor tanning for youth aged <18 years. Using data from a nationally representative sample, this study assessed parental support for age-based bans as well as less restrictive parental permission requirements.

methodsData came from an online survey completed by 1,244 parents of adolescents aged 11-17 years. Weighted multivariable logistic regression models assessed correlates of supporting an indoor tanning ban for youth aged <18 years. Data collection and analysis occurred in 2016.

resultsAlmost two thirds (65%) of parents agreed with indoor tanning bans for youth, with smaller proportions having no opinion (23%) or disagreeing (12%). Support for bans increased with greater perceived harm of indoor tanning for adolescents (OR=2.66, 95% CI=1.97, 3.59) and decreased with greater perceived benefits (OR=0.49, 95% CI=0.36, 0.67). Compared with support for bans, support for parental permission requirements was somewhat higher, with 79% of parents agreeing with the policy. Most parents (60%) agreed with both policies; only 4% disagreed with both.

conclusionsAge-based indoor tanning restrictions, including bans, engender broad-based support among parents. Communicating the harm of indoor tanning may facilitate the implementation of these policies.

Indexed as

AdolescentAge FactorsChildFemaleHumansMaleParentsSunbathing

Identifiers

PMID28522236
PMCPMC5610053
OpenAlexW2616859013

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.