ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019
Differential Relationship between Tobacco Control Policies and U.S. Adult Current Smoking by Poverty.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- A systematic review and network meta-analysis of population-level interventions to tackle smoking behaviour.Nature human behaviour · 2024Pooled it
- SimSmoke simulation models distinguished by race/ethnicity: past and future trends and the potential role of policy.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs · 2025Article
- Associations between state tobacco control measures and cigarette purchases by U.S. households, 2015-2021.Preventive medicine · 2025Article
- Social Ecological Influences on Nicotine/Tobacco Use Among Gender-Varying and Gender-Stable Adolescents and Adults in the USA.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2024Article
- Cigarette smoking behaviors and the importance of ethnicity and genetic ancestry.Translational psychiatry · 2021Article
- Good intentions, unintended outcomes: Impact of social assistance on tobacco consumption in Indonesia.Tobacco induced diseases · 2021Article
- Area-Level Predictors of Tobacco 21 Coverage in the U.S. Before the National Law: Exploring Potential Disparities.American journal of preventive medicine · 2021Article
- Associations between smoking trajectories, smoke-free laws and cigarette taxes in a longitudinal sample of youth and young adults.PloS one · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The study's purpose was to identify differences in the relationship between tobacco control policies and smoking by poverty. We matched state smoke-free air law coverage (SFALs), tobacco control funding (TCF), and cigarette taxes with individual current smoking and demographics from supplements to the Current Population Survey (1985-2015). We regressed (logistic) smoking on policy variables, poverty (<138% of poverty line versus ≥138% of poverty line), interactions of policy and poverty, and covariates, presenting beta coefficients instead of odds ratios because it is difficult to interpret interactions using odds ratios (they are ratios of odds ratios). We coded SFALs as (1) proportion of state covered by 100% workplace, restaurant and bar laws (SFAL-All) or (2) proportion of state covered by workplace laws (SFAL-WP) and proportion covered by restaurant or bar laws (SFAL-RB). In the SFAL-All model, SFAL-All (Beta coeff: -0.03, 95% CI: -0.06, -0.002), tax (Coeff: -0.06, 95% CI: -0.07, -0.05), and TCF (Coeff: -0.01, 95% CI: -0.01, -0.001) were associated with less smoking. In this model, the interaction of SFAL-All by poverty was significant (Coeff: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.02, 0.13). In the SFAL-WP/RB model, SFAL-RB (Coeff: -0.05, 95% CI: -0.08, -0.02), tax (Coeff: -0.05, 95% CI: -0.06, -0.04), and TCF (Coeff: -0.01, 95% CI: -0.01, -0.00) were significant. In the same model, SFAL-WP (Coeff: 0.09, 95% CI: 0.03, 0.15), SFAL-RB (Coeff: -0.14, 95% CI: -0.19, -0.09), and TCF (Coeff: 0.01, 95% CI: 0.00, 0.02) interacted with poverty. Tax by poverty was of borderline significance in this model (Coeff = 0.02, 95% CI: -0.00, 0.04,
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.