Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31956472›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine reports2020

Do inequalities add up? Intersectional inequalities in smoking by sexual orientation and education among U.S. adults.

Nada Amroussia, Per E Gustafsson, Jennifer L Pearson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Sex and Sexual Identity Differences in Poly-tobacco Use and Psychological Distress in U.S. Adults: Results From the National Health Interview Survey.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

3 authors.

Nada AmroussiaDivision of Social and Behavioral Health, University of Nevada, Reno, USA.
Per E GustafssonDepartment of Epidemiology and Global Health, Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden.
Jennifer L PearsonDivision of Social and Behavioral Health/Health Administration and Policy, University of Nevada, Reno, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInequalities in smoking by socio-economic status (SES) are well-known. A growing body of literature has demonstrated additional inequalities in smoking by sexual orientation. This study used an intersectional lens to examine smoking at the intersection of sexual orientation and education.

methodsData come from 28,362 adult participants in Wave 2 (2014-2015) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study. We used educational level (less than high school education (HS); HS or more) and sexual orientation (heterosexual; sexual minority) to form four intersectional positions.We estimated prevalence differences in smoking corresponding to joint, referent, and excess intersectional inequalities using weighted linear binomial regression models. Results were stratified by gender and adjusted for ethnicity and age.

resultsThe adjusted joint inequality represented 7.6% points (p.p.) (95% CI: 2.5, 12.8) difference in smoking between the doubly advantaged (heterosexual with HS or more) and doubly disadvantaged (sexual minority with less than HS) positions. Joint inequality was decomposed into referent SES inequality (12.5 p.p. (95% CI: 10.5, 14.4)); referent sexual orientation inequality (9.7 p.p. (95% CI: 6.8, 12.6)); and a substantial negative excess intersectional inequality (-14.6 p.p. (95% CI: -20.8, -8.3)), attributed to an unexpectedly low prevalence of smoking among doubly disadvantaged persons. Similar overall patterns were found in the stratified analyses.

conclusionsWe found that "doubly-disadvantaged" group of low-educated sexual minority adults did not have the greatest burden of smoking; whereas, low-educated heterosexual adults had the highest smoking prevalence. Our findings support tailoring cessation interventions to disadvantaged groups' different needs.

Indexed as

Cigarette smokingHealth inequalityIntersectionalitySexual and Gender minoritiesSocio-economic statusUnited States

Identifiers

PMID31956472
PMCPMC6957789

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.