ArticleBMC public health2017
Tobacco-free policies at worksites in Kansas.
Article in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Provider Perspectives on a Tobacco-Free Workplace Program in Healthcare Settings Serving Rural and Medically Underserved Areas of Texas: A Mixed Methods Study on Perceived Resource Availability and Value.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Article
- Revolutionizing healthcare: Unleashing the power of regulatory measures to enforce smoke-free policies in Indonesian medical facilities.Health promotion perspectives · 2025Article
- Worksite tobacco control - a qualitative study on perspectives from employers and employees at small worksites.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Cumulative disadvantage as a framework for understanding rural tobacco use disparities.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2021Review
- Geographical distribution and social determinants of Tobacco 21 policy adoption and retail inspections in the United States, 2015-2019.Tobacco induced diseases · 2021Article
- Disparities in Rural Tobacco Use, Smoke-Free Policies, and Tobacco Taxes.Western journal of nursing research · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study sought to examine the relationship between tobacco-free policies at worksites to worksite demographics such as company size and geographic location.
methodsWorksites participating in a worksite wellness workshop were asked to complete a worksite wellness instrument, which provided an assessment of their wellness practices already in place in the worksite, including the degree to which tobacco-free policies were in place at the worksite.
resultsAt a bivariate level, those more likely to have tobacco-free policies included: urban employers (76.8% versus 50% rural employers, p = 0.0001); large employers (> = 250 employees) (74.3% versus 43.1% small employers (<50 employees), p = 0.0003); and schools (69.4%) and hospitals (61.5%) (versus 35.5%, agricultural/ manufacturing employers, p = 0.0125). At the multivariate level, rural employers (AOR = 0.47, 95% CI 0.23, 0.95) and small employers (AOR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.16, 0.71) had decreased odds, compared to their urban and large employer counterparts, of having tobacco-free policies.
conclusionsRural and smaller employers are less likely to have tobacco-free policies than their urban and large counterparts.
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.