ArticlePublic health nutrition2019
Comparing and contrasting responses to tobacco control and obesity policies: a qualitative study.
Article in Public health nutrition, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo explore people's perceptions of, and responses to, obesity and tobacco policies with a particular focus on motivation; and to compare and contrast responses to explore the potential for translating learning across domains.
designA theoretically informed comparative qualitative study involving semi-structured interviews with two groups of participants (smokers and ex-smokers; those who have previously or are currently attempting to lose weight). Data were analysed inductively using thematic analysis and interpreted through the lens of Self-Determination Theory.
settingCommunity-based.
participantsInterviews were conducted with five smokers and four ex-smokers around tobacco policy, and seventeen people acting to control their weight around obesity policy.
resultsThree primary themes were identified. (i) Participants believed social norms to be crucial to supporting health behaviour change and responses to policy; not smoking was perceived as socially normal, whereas being physically active and eating healthily were perceived to go against social norms. (ii) Policies influencing the physical environment were perceived to support stopping smoking (e.g. smoke-free laws, advertising bans), but to undermine attempts to lose or control weight (e.g. high visibility, availability and low cost of energy-dense foods). (iii) While policies for both domains were considered necessary and legitimate, both groups found policy interventions neither motivating nor undermining of their sense of autonomy.
conclusionsThe results suggest those trying to lose weight respond similarly to obesity-related policy as smokers do to tobacco policy. Environmental interventions are perceived to be more helpful than appealing to people's motivation to change for their own sake.
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.