Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32539788›Full record

ReviewBMC public health2020

Inequalities, harm reduction and non-combustible nicotine products: a meta-ethnography of qualitative evidence.

Mark Lucherini, Sarah Hill, Katherine Smith

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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.

Mark LucheriniSchool of Geography, Geology and the Environment, Keele University, Keele, UK. m.lucherini@keele.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1494-7740
Sarah HillGlobal Health Policy Unit, School of Social & Political Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK.
Katherine SmithSchool of Social Work & Social Policy, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 21553Cancer Research UK C55561/A21553
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe sought to review qualitative evidence on how smokers in different socioeconomic groups engage with non-combustible nicotine products (NCNP), including electronic cigarettes and nicotine replacement therapies, in order to provide insight into how these products might impact on smoking inequalities.

methodsWe searched ten electronic databases in February 2017 using terms relating to NCNP and socioeconomic status. We included qualitative studies that were published since 1980 and were available in English. We used guidelines adapted from the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme for appraising qualitative research.

resultsThe review only identified studies exploring the attitudes of socioeconomically disadvantaged smokers towards NCNP for harm reduction or cessation purposes (i.e. we did not identify any relevant studies of more advantaged socioeconomic groups). Using a lines-of-argument meta-ethnographic approach, we identified a predominantly pessimistic attitude to NCNP for harm reduction or cessation of smoking due to: wider circumstances of socioeconomic disadvantage; lack of a perceived advantage of alternative products over smoking; and a perceived lack of information about relative harms of NCNP compared to smoking. Optimistic findings, although fewer, suggested the potential of NCNP being taken up among smokers experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage.

conclusionsOverall, our review highlights the importance of considering the social, cultural and economic circumstances that influence experiences of smoking and of alternative product use.

Indexed as

Anthropology, CulturalAdultAgedAged, 80 and overElectronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsEuropeFemaleHarm ReductionHealth BehaviorHumansMaleMiddle AgedNicotineQualitative ResearchSmokersSmoking CessationNicotineE-cigarettesInequalitiesNicotine replacement therapyQualitative research; socioeconomic statusSmokeless tobacco

Identifiers

PMID32539788
PMCPMC7296947

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.