Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30371833›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of public health2018

The perspectives of politicians on tobacco control in Turkey.

Hilal Ozcebe, Toker Erguder, Mehmet Balcilar, Pavel Ursu, Aaron Reeves, David Stuckler, Andrew Snell, Gauden Galea, Bente Mikkelsen, Kristina Mauer-Stender

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 8 countries.

Hilal OzcebeDepartment of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Hacettepe, Ankara, Turkey.
Toker ErguderWorld Health Organisation Country Office, Ankara, Turkey.
Mehmet BalcilarEastern Mediterranean University, Famagusta, Turkey.
Pavel UrsuWorld Health Organisation Country Office, Ankara, Turkey.
Aaron ReevesDepartment of Social Policy and Intervention, University of Oxford, Oxford, England.
David StucklerDepartment of Social and Political Sciences, Università Bocconi, Milan, Italy.
Andrew SnellWorld Health Organisation Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Gauden GaleaWorld Health Organisation Country Office, Beijing, China.
Bente MikkelsenWorld Health Organisation Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Kristina Mauer-StenderWorld Health Organisation Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, Denmark.
World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe · DKWorld Health Organization - Pakistan · PKBocconi University · ITHacettepe University · TRMontpellier Business School · FRUniversity of Oxford · GB

Funding

Wellcome TrustWorld Health Organization 001
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Tobacco use is a leading but preventable cause of non-communicable diseases and premature death. The legislature has a key role in setting tobacco control policies. Smoking trends are decreasing thanks to the introduction of effective tobacco control policies in Turkey and these policies may have been shaped by how politicians' interpreted social problems that were prominent during the development and implementation of tobacco regulations. Aim: This paper explores the long-term national relationship between tobacco consumption, tobacco control policies and the associated political discourse in Turkey, considering the varying influences through national leadership on this important public health agenda. This relationship is studied by comparing a time series analysis of tobacco consumption trends with a policy analysis of the minutes of deliberations at the Grand National Assembly of Turkey (GNAT). Methods: This study uses Bayesian time series analysis in order investigate whether the tobacco control policies and related activities influenced the annual per adult cigarette consumption in Turkey. We used a novel method to identify change points in tobacco trends and whether they correspond with key policy changes intended to alter usage after adjusting for the effect of other non-policy related covariates, such as the purchasing power. The policy analysis included an examination of the minutes of deliberations at the GNAT-which is the Turkish parliament and unicameral Turkish legislature-1 year before and 1 year after the break years associated with an increase or decrease in tobacco consumption. Results and recommendations: Tobacco consumption increased with the encouragement of tobacco production and the entrance of multinational companies in the country in 1976 and 1993, respectively. The National Tobacco Law of 1996 and comprehensive amendments in 2008, including smoke-free public places and tax increases, appear to have helped reduce tobacco consumption in Turkey. The focus of Parliamentary discussions throughout this period changed, becoming less supportive of tobacco over time. However, throughout the period there remained discussions focussing on concerns around the implications for the economy and the privatization agenda, national agriculture and the welfare of farmers. Effective control appears to require certain political ingredients to be implemented: politicians who are well informed on tobacco control measures and understand the range of issues surrounding the policies (not only those directly health-related); and supportive public health information in the community. Evidence-based public health policy should be introduced to the politicians.

Indexed as

PoliticsPublic HealthPublic PolicyHumansSmokingTobacco IndustryTobacco ProductsTurkey

Identifiers

PMID30371833
PMCPMC6204546
OpenAlexW2898788331

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.