ArticlePloS one2020
The 20-year impact of tobacco price and tobacco control expenditure increases in Minnesota, 1998-2017.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Projecting the impact of strengthened tobacco control policy on disparities in US states with persistently high smoking rates.Tobacco induced diseases · 2025Article
- Illuminating a Path Forward for Tobacco Nation: Projected Impacts of Recommended Policies on Geographic Disparities.Tobacco use insights · 2023Article
- Understanding the Impact of COVID-19 on Tobacco and Nicotine Use among Young Adults Identified as Sexual and Gender Minorities: A Mixed Methods Approach.Drugs (Abingdon, England) · 2022Article
- Planning for tomorrow: global cancer incidence and the role of prevention 2020-2070.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2021Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionTobacco control programs and policies reduce tobacco use and prevent health and economic harms. The majority of tobacco control programs and policies in the United States are implemented at local and state levels. Yet the literature on state-level initiatives reports a limited set of outcomes. To facilitate decision-making that is increasingly focused on costs, we provide estimates of a broader set of measures of the impact of tobacco control policy, including smoking prevalence, disease events, deaths, medical costs, productivity and tobacco tax revenues, using the experience of Minnesota as an example.
methodsUsing the HealthPartners Institute's ModelHealth™: Tobacco MN microsimulation, we assessed the impact of the stream of tobacco control expenditures and cigarette price increases from 1998 to 2017. We simulated 1.3 million individuals representative of the Minnesota population.
resultsThe simulation estimated that increased expenditures on tobacco control above 1997 levels prevented 38,400 cancer, cardiovascular, diabetes and respiratory disease events and 4,100 deaths over 20 years. Increased prices prevented 14,600 additional events and 1,700 additional deaths. Both the net increase in tax revenues and the reduction in medical costs were greater than the additional investments in tobacco control.
conclusionCombined, the policies address both short-term and long-term goals to reduce the harms of tobacco by helping adults who wish to quit smoking and deterring youth from starting to smoke. States can pay for initial investments in tobacco control through tax increases and recoup those investments through reduced expenditures on medical care.
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.