Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30976965›Full record

ArticleJournal of community health2019

A Process Evaluation of the Skin Cancer Prevention Act (Tanning Beds): A Survey of Ontario Public Health Units.

Jessica Reimann, Jennifer E McWhirter, Andrew Papadopoulos, Kim Bergeron, Susan Flynn, Loraine Marrett, Thomas Tenkate, Cheryl F Rosen, Cate Dewey

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of community health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Prevalence of tanning equipment use among Canadians.Preventive medicine reports · 2021
    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

9 authors.

Jessica ReimannDepartment of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Jennifer E McWhirterDepartment of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada. j.mcwhirter@uoguelph.ca.
Andrew PapadopoulosDepartment of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.
Kim BergeronSchool of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen's University, Kingston, ON, K7L 3N6, Canada.
Susan FlynnCancer Care Prevention, Canadian Cancer Society, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Loraine MarrettDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5S 1A1, Canada.
Thomas TenkateSchool of Occupational and Public Health, Ryerson University, Toronto, ON, M5B 2K3, Canada.
Cheryl F RosenDermatology Centre, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, ON, M5T 2S8, Canada.
Cate DeweyDepartment of Population Medicine, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Evidence of the dangers of indoor tanning and its popularity, including among youth, led the Government of Ontario to pass the Skin Cancer Prevention Act (Tanning Beds) (SCPA) in 2014. This legislation includes prohibiting the sale of indoor tanning services to individuals under 18, requiring warning signs be posted, and other safety regulations. We collected information from Ontario Public Health Units to conduct a process evaluation of the SCPA to: understand legislation implementation; assess available evidence about compliance, inspection, and enforcement; and, note barriers and facilitators related to inspection and enforcement. Data was collected March-April 2018. All 36 Ontario Public Health Units were invited to participate in an online questionnaire about the SCPA. Questions covered complaints, inspection, and enforcement, and used both close- and open-ended questions. Participants from 20 Public Health Units responded to the questionnaire; a response rate of 56%. These agencies reported 485 facilities offer indoor tanning. Since 2014, there have been 242 infractions by tanning facility owner/operators related to the SCPA, with most being uncovered during non-mandatory routine inspections (n = 234, 97%), rather than mandatory complaint-based inspections (n = 8, 3%). Most infractions were related to warning signs (n = 201, 83%). No charges were issued for any infractions. Instead, providing education (n = 90, 62%) and issuing warnings (n = 33, 23%) were the most common enforcement strategies. SCPA amendments are needed, including mandatory, routinely scheduled inspections. In addition to providing education, fines may improve compliance. More resources are required for inspection and enforcement of the SCPA.

Indexed as

Public HealthSunbathingHumansOntarioProcess Assessment, Health CareSkin NeoplasmsSurveys and QuestionnairesComplianceEnforcementIndoor tanningInspectionSkin Cancer Prevention Act

Identifiers

PMID30976965

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.