Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30486817›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2018

Opening windows and closing gaps: a case analysis of Canada's 2009 tobacco additives ban and its policy lessons.

Raphael Lencucha, Arne Ruckert, Ronald Labonte, Jeffrey Drope

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Prior Daily Menthol Smokers More Likely to Quit 2 Years After a Menthol Ban Than Non-menthol Smokers: A Population Cohort Study.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2021
    Article
  4. Adoption of Tobacco 21: A Cross-Case Analysis of Ten US States.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  5. Review
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

4 authors.

Raphael LencuchaFaculty of Medicine, School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill University, 3630 Promenade Sir William Osler, Montreal, QC, H3G 1Y5, Canada. raphael.lencucha@mcgill.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9273-2027
Arne RuckertSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Ronald LabonteSchool of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Jeffrey DropeEconomic and Health Policy Research, American Cancer Society, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Funding

American Cancer Society None
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn 2009, Canada adopted legislation (Bill C-32) restricting the sale of flavoured tobacco products, one of the first in the world. This study examines the agenda-setting process leading to the adoption of Bill C-32.

methodsThis research was conducted using a case study design informed by Kingdon's Multiple Streams framework and Heclo's policy learning approach. In-depth interviews were conducted with key informants from government, health-based non-governmental organizations (NGOs), trade associations and the cigar manufacturing sector (n = 11). Public documents produced by media (n = 19), government (n = 11), NGOs (n = 15), as well as technical reports (n = 8) and formal stakeholder submissions (n = 137) were included for analysis. Data were coded with the objective of understanding key events or moments in the lead up to the adoption of Bill C-32 and the actors and arguments in support of and opposition to Bill C-32.

resultsThe findings point to the importance of a small but active group of NGOs who worked to publicize the issue and eventually take advantage of an open policy window. Our analysis also illustrates that even though consensus was developed about the policy problem and civil society was able to garner political support to address the problem, disagreement and dissent pertaining to the technical dimensions of the policy solution created loopholes for the tobacco industry to exploit.

conclusionsNGOs remain a critical factor in efforts to strengthen tobacco control policy. These organizations were able to mobilize support for the tobacco flavouring ban adopted at the Federal level in Canada, and although the initial Bill had major limitations to achieving the health objectives, the persistence of these NGOs resulted in amendments to close these loopholes.

Indexed as

Flavoring AgentsPublic PolicyCanadaCommerceGovernmentHumansOrganizationsTobacco IndustryTobacco ProductsFlavoring Agents

Identifiers

PMID30486817
PMCPMC6260734

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.