Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29627511›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine2018

Trend differences in men and women in rural and urban U.S. settings.

A Cepeda-Benito, N J Doogan, R Redner, M E Roberts, A N Kurti, A C Villanti, A A Lopez, A J Quisenberry, C A Stanton, D E Gaalema and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Observational
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors.

A Cepeda-BenitoUniversity of Vermont Center of Tobacco Regulatory Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychological Science, University of Vermont, United States. Electronic address: acepeda@uvm.edu.
N J DooganCenter of Excellence in Regulatory Tobacco Science, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, United States.
R RednerUniversity of Vermont Center of Tobacco Regulatory Science, University of Vermont, United States; Rehabilitation Institute, Southern Illinois University, United States.
M E RobertsCenter of Excellence in Regulatory Tobacco Science, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, United States.
A N KurtiUniversity of Vermont Center of Tobacco Regulatory Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychological Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, United States.
A C VillantiUniversity of Vermont Center of Tobacco Regulatory Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, United States.
A A LopezUniversity of Vermont Center of Tobacco Regulatory Science, University of Vermont, United States.
A J QuisenberryCenter of Excellence in Regulatory Tobacco Science, College of Public Health, The Ohio State University, United States.
C A StantonWestat, Center for Evaluation and Coordination of Training and Research (CECTR) in Tobacco Regulatory Science, Department of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, United States; Department of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center / Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, United States.
D E GaalemaUniversity of Vermont Center of Tobacco Regulatory Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychological Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, United States.
D R KeithUniversity of Vermont Center of Tobacco Regulatory Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, United States.
M A ParkerUniversity of Vermont Center of Tobacco Regulatory Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, United States.
S T HigginsUniversity of Vermont Center of Tobacco Regulatory Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychological Science, University of Vermont, United States; Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, United States.

Funding

Vermont Center on Behavior and HealthP20GM103644 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI KHADANGA, SHERRIE · 2013 to 2022
$21.3M
University of Vermont Tobacco Center of Regulatory ScienceU54DA036114 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI HIGGINS, STEPHEN T · 2018 to 2022
$19.4M
Vermont Center on Tobacco Regulatory ScienceP50DA036114 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI HIGGINS, STEPHEN T · 2013 to 2017
$19.1M
Project 4: Comprehension of Health Risks in More and Less Arousing Affe p240-275P50CA180908 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI SHIELDS, PETER G., WEWERS, MARY ELLEN · 2013 to 2017
$18.9M
Leadership and Administrative Core (p 188-304)U54CA189222 · NCI · WESTAT, INC. · PI ABRAMS, DAVID BRIAN, ROSENTHAL, JEANNE · 2014 to 2018
$8.5M
TRAINING IN BEHAV. PHARMACOLOGY OF HUMAN DRUG DEPENDENCET32DA007242 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT &ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI HEIL, SARAH H, HIGGINS, STEPHEN T · 1990 to 2025
$8.2M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA180908NCI NIH HHS U54 CA189222NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA036114NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA007242NIDA NIH HHS U54 DA036114NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM103644
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSmoking prevalence is declining at a slower rate in rural than urban settings in the United States (U.S.), and known predictors of smoking do not readily account for this trend difference. Given that socioeconomic and psychosocial determinants of health disparities accumulate in rural settings and that life-course disadvantages are often greater in women than men, we examined whether smoking trends are different for rural and urban men and women.

methodWe used yearly cross-sectional data (n = 303,311) from the U.S. National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) from 2007 through 2014 to compare cigarette smoking trends in men and women across rural and urban areas. Current smoking status was modelled using logistic regression controlling for confounding risk factors.

resultsRegression derived graphs predicting unadjusted prevalence estimates and 95% confidence bands revealed that whereas the smoking trends of rural men, urban men, and urban women significantly declined from 2007 to 2014, the trend for rural women was flat. Controlling for demographic, socioeconomic and psychosocial predictors of smoking did not explain rural women's significantly different trend from those of the other three groups.

conclusionRural women lag behind rural men, urban men and urban women in decreasing smoking, a health disparity finding that supports the need for tobacco control and regulatory policies and interventions that are more effective in reducing smoking among rural women.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrevalenceRisk FactorsRural PopulationSex FactorsSmokingSocioeconomic FactorsTobacco ProductsRural smokingSmoking gender differencesSmoking trendsTobacco controlTobacco regulation

Identifiers

PMID29627511
PMCPMC6173654

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.