Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28778972›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2018

Tobacco policy reform and population-wide antismoking activities in Australia: the impact on smoking during pregnancy.

Alys Havard, Duong T Tran, Anna Kemp-Casey, Kristjana Einarsdóttir, David B Preen, Louisa R Jorm

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco control, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% 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, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Tobacco dependence treatment for special populations: challenges and opportunities.Revista brasileira de psiquiatria (Sao Paulo, Brazil : 1999) · 2020
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Alys HavardCentre for Big Data Research in Health, School of Population and Global Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Duong T TranCentre for Big Data Research in Health, School of Population and Global Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Anna Kemp-CaseyCentre for Health Services Research, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Kristjana EinarsdóttirCentre of Public Health Sciences and Unit for Nutrition Research, University of Iceland, Reykjavik, Iceland.
David B PreenCentre for Health Services Research, University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Louisa R JormCentre for Big Data Research in Health, School of Population and Global Health, UNSW Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
UNSW Sydney · AUUniversity of Western Australia · AUUniversity of Iceland · IS

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThis study examined the impact of antismoking activities targeting the general population and an advertising campaign targeting smoking during pregnancy on the prevalence of smoking during pregnancy in New South Wales (NSW), Australia.

methodsMonthly prevalence of smoking during pregnancy was calculated using linked health records for all pregnancies resulting in a birth (800 619) in NSW from 2003 to 2011. Segmented regression of interrupted time series data assessed the effects of the extension of the ban on smoking in enclosed public places to include licensed premises (evaluated in combination with the mandating of graphic warnings on cigarette packs), television advertisements targeting smoking in the general population, print and online magazine advertisements targeting smoking during pregnancy and increased tobacco tax. Analyses were conducted for all pregnancies, and for the population stratified by maternal age, parity and socioeconomic status. Further analyses adjusted for the effect of the Baby Bonus maternity payment.

resultsPrevalence of smoking during pregnancy decreased from 2003 to 2011 overall (0.39% per month), and for all strata examined. For pregnancies overall, none of the evaluated initiatives was associated with a change in the trend of smoking during pregnancy. Significant changes associated with increased tobacco tax and the extension of the smoking ban (in combination with graphic warnings) were found in some strata.

conclusionsThe declining prevalence of smoking during pregnancy between 2003 and 2011, while encouraging, does not appear to be directly related to general population antismoking activities or a pregnancy-specific campaign undertaken in this period.

Indexed as

Public PolicyAdolescentAdultAdvertisingFemaleHumansNew South WalesPregnancyPrevalenceSmokingSmoking PreventionYoung Adultpriority/special populationspublic policytaxation

Identifiers

PMID28778972
PMCPMC6109232
OpenAlexW2742991363

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.