Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32432189›Full record

ArticleTobacco prevention & cessation2017

Have higher cigarette taxes in the United States discouraged smoking? A review of data from 1999-2013.

Ben Musumba Wamamili, Adam Philip Garrow

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco prevention & cessation, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

2 authors.

Ben Musumba WamamiliSchool of Health Sciences, University of Canterbury, New Zealand.
Adam Philip GarrowDivision of Population Health, Health Services Research and Primary Care, University of Manchester, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCigarette smoking continues to be a leading cause of preventable morbidity and premature death in the United States. This study examined the impact of federal and state cigarette excise taxes on adult smoking between 1999 and 2013.

methodsData came from the National Health Interview Survey, Behavioural Risk Factor Surveillance System and Tax Burden on Tobacco. Analyses were done from 1999-2013, 2002-6 and 2009-13. Associations between cigarette taxes, prices and smoking were examined in several states based on cigarette tax: Missouri and Virginia (low tax), Florida, Nebraska and Nevada (median tax) and New York and Rhode Island (high tax).

resultsSmoking declined nationally from 22.8% (1999) to 19.0% (2013) with rates falling from 25.7% to 20.5% in men and 21.5% to 15.3% in women. Annual cigarette consumption (in millions) declined from 432,758 to 280,534 and per capita consumption from 1,621 cigarettes (1999) to 894 cigarettes (2013). Smoking declined across age, gender, race/ethnicity, education and poverty level in 2009-13 compared to 2002-6 with large reductions in states with higher cigarette taxes. Negative correlations between cigarette tax and smoking, and positive correlations between cigarette tax and price, were seen.

conclusionsHigher cigarette taxes appear to have had a negative impact on smoking in the US. Our data suggest that states with higher cigarette taxes have lower smoking rates than states with lower taxes. Tax measures are however implemented as part of a comprehensive tobacco control package and further research is needed to assess the relative contribution of cigarette tax on smoking reductions in the states examined.

Indexed as

cigarette priceCigarette taxtobacco use

Identifiers

PMID32432189
PMCPMC7232812

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.