Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31211777›Full record

ArticlePLoS medicine2019

College affirmative action bans and smoking and alcohol use among underrepresented minority adolescents in the United States: A difference-in-differences study.

Atheendar S Venkataramani, Erin Cook, Rourke L O'Brien, Ichiro Kawachi, Anupam B Jena, Alexander C Tsai

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLoS medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing 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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Heterogeneous and racialized impacts of state incarceration policies on birth outcomes in the United States.Social forces; a scientific medium of social study and interpretation · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Understanding the benefits of different types and timing of education for mental health: A sequence analysis approach.The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. 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

6 authors.

Atheendar S VenkataramaniDepartment of Medical Ethics and Health Policy, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-7612-8903
Erin CookAnalysis Group, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-9737-9130
Rourke L O'BrienLa Follette School of Public Affairs, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, Wisconsin, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-8932-3556
Ichiro KawachiDepartment of Social and Behavioral Science, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.
Anupam B JenaDepartment of Health Care Policy, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9734-5122
Alexander C TsaiChester M. Pierce, M.D. Division of Global Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0001-6397-7917

Funding

Physician Determinants of Health Care Spending, Quality, and Patient OutcomesDP5OD017897 · OD · HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL · PI JENA, ANUPAM BAPU · 2013 to 2017
$2.1M
NIH HHS DP5 OD017897
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCollege affirmative action programs seek to expand socioeconomic opportunities for underrepresented minorities. Between 1996 and 2013, 9 US states-including California, Texas, and Michigan-banned race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Because economic opportunity is known to motivate health behavior, banning affirmative action policies may have important adverse spillover effects on health risk behaviors. We used a quasi-experimental research design to evaluate the association between college affirmative action bans and health risk behaviors among underrepresented minority (Black, Hispanic, and Native American) adolescents. METHODS AND

findingsWe conducted a difference-in-differences analysis using data from the 1991-2015 US national Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS). We compared changes in self-reported cigarette smoking and alcohol use in the 30 days prior to survey among underrepresented minority 11th and 12th graders in states implementing college affirmative action bans (Arizona, California, Florida, Michigan, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington) versus outcomes among those residing in states not implementing bans (n = 35 control states). We also assessed whether underrepresented minority adults surveyed in the 1992-2015 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey (TUS-CPS) who were exposed to affirmative action bans during their late high school years continued to smoke cigarettes between the ages of 19 and 30 years. Models adjusted for individual demographic characteristics, state and year fixed effects, and state-specific secular trends. In the YRBS (n = 34,988 to 36,268, depending on the outcome), cigarette smoking in the past 30 days among underrepresented minority 11th-12th graders increased by 3.8 percentage points after exposure to an affirmative action ban (95% CI: 2.0, 5.7; p < 0.001). In addition, there were also apparent increases in past-30-day alcohol use, by 5.9 percentage points (95% CI: 0.3, 12.2; p = 0.041), and past-30-day binge drinking, by 3.5 percentage points (95% CI: -0.1, 7.2, p = 0.058), among underrepresented minority 11th-12th graders, though in both cases adjustment for multiple comparisons resulted in failure to reject the null hypothesis (adjusted p = 0.083 for both outcomes). Underrepresented minority adults in the TUS-CPS (n = 71,575) exposed to bans during their late high school years were also 1.8 percentage points more likely to report current smoking (95% CI: 0.1, 3.6; p = 0.037). Event study analyses revealed a discrete break for all health behaviors timed with policy discussion and implementation. No substantive or statistically significant effects were found for non-Hispanic White adolescents, and the findings were robust to a number of additional specification checks. The limitations of the study include the continued potential for residual confounding from unmeasured time-varying factors and the potential for recall bias due to the self-reported nature of the health risk behavior outcomes.

conclusionsIn this study, we found evidence that some health risk behaviors increased among underrepresented minority adolescents after exposure to state-level college affirmative action bans. These findings suggest that social policies that shift socioeconomic opportunities could have meaningful population health consequences.

Indexed as

Health Risk BehaviorsAdolescentAlcohol Drinking in CollegeFemaleHealth SurveysHumansMaleMinority GroupsSmokingUniversities

Identifiers

PMID31211777
PMCPMC6581254

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.