Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31041409›Full record

ArticleJournal of preventive medicine and hygiene2019

Smoke-free environment policy in Vietnam: what did people see and how did they react when they visited various public places?

V H Nguyen, D A DO, T T H DO, T M A Dao, B G Kim, T H Phan, T H Doan, N K Luong, T L Nguyen, V M Hoang and 2 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of preventive medicine and hygiene, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 35% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Subnational smoke-free laws in China.Tobacco induced diseases · 2019
    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

12 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.

V H NguyenDepartment of Health Management and Organization, Institute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Vietnam.
D A DODepartment of International Cooperation, Ministry of Health, Hanoi, Vietnam.
T T H DONational Hospital of Dermatology and Venereology, Vietnam.
T M A DaoDepartment of Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical School, USA.
B G KimInstitute for Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Hanoi Medical University, Vietnam.
T H PhanVietnam Steering Committee on Smoking and Health (VINACOSH), Hanoi, Ministry of Health, Vietnam.
T H DoanVietnam Steering Committee on Smoking and Health (VINACOSH), Hanoi, Ministry of Health, Vietnam.
N K LuongMedical Services Administration, Ministry of Health, Hanoi, Vietnam.
T L NguyenWHO Office, Hanoi, Vietnam.
V M HoangHanoi University of Public Health, Hanoi, Vietnam.
T Q N PhamWHO Office, Hanoi, Vietnam.
T Q NguyenGeneral Statistics Office, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Hanoi University of Pharmacy · VNHealth Strategy and Policy Institute · VNMinistry of Health · VNUniversity of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · USHanoi Medical University · VNHanoi University · VNVietnam National Children's Hospital · VN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSince Vietnam has signed WHO framework on tobacco control (FCTC) in 2003 and has issued tobacco control law in 2013, there has been little research concerning about what impacts smoke-free regulations have had on public compliance. The objective of this study was to assess public exposure to secondhand smoke and reaction toward smoke-free policy regulations in Vietnam and the associated factor.

methodsUsing the design of GATS (Global Adult Tobacco Survey), a nationally representative sample of 8,996 adults were approached for data collection. Logistic regression was used to examine the associated factor.

resultsThe study revealed that the prevalence of respondents exposed to secondhand smoke was much higher in bars/café/tea shops (90.07%) and restaurants (81.81%) than in any other public places, universities (36.70%), government buildings (31.12%), public transport (20.04%), healthcare facilities (17.85%) and schools (15.84%). 13.23% of respondents saw smokers violate smoke-free regulations. Among those who saw them violate smoke-free regulations, just one-third cautioned them to stop smoking. Strikingly, a higher rate of cautioning smokers to stop smoking was observed among the older, married, and better educated respondents. Respondents who were married, better educated and in lower economic status were more likely to remind smokers to stop smoking.

conclusionsThe study has called for strengthening two of the six MPOWER (Monitor, Protect, Offer, Warn, Enforce and Raise) components of the tobacco free initiative introduced by WHO, Monitoring tobacco use and prevention policies and Protecting people from tobacco smoke.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedCrimeFemaleHealth FacilitiesHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedRestaurantsSchoolsSmoke-Free PolicySurveys and QuestionnairesTobacco Smoke PollutionTransportationTobacco Smoke PollutionGATS (Global adults tobacco survey)MPOWERSHS (Secondhand smoke)Smoke-free environment policySmoke-free regulationsVietnam

Identifiers

PMID31041409
PMCPMC6477555
OpenAlexW2943397679

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.