Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32817644›Full record

ArticlePloS one2020

Going smoke-free: University staff and students' qualitative views about smoking on campus during the implementation of a smoke-free policy.

Marguerite C Sendall, Chantal Le Lievre, Laura K McCosker, Lauren Brewis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

4 authors.

Marguerite C SendallSchool of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Chantal Le LievreSchool of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Laura K McCoskerSchool of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Lauren BrewisSchool of Public Health and Social Work, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite many Australian universities introducing smoke-free policies on campus, there is little information about staff and students understanding of smoking on campus in the context of the implementation of a smoke-free policy.

objectiveThis research explores the qualitative views of university staff and students about smoking on campus during the implementation of a smoke-free policy.

methodsIn 2016, an electronic survey was distributed to all current staff and students of a large university in Queensland, Australia during the implementation of a smoke-free policy. The survey consisted of multiple-choice questions about demographics, tobacco use, attitudes towards smoking, awareness of and attitudes towards the policy, and intentions to quit smoking. The final question asked for a short, open-ended response: "Would you like to comment on the issue of smoking on QUT* campuses?" This question was extracted from the survey and analysed using inductive thematic analysis. This paper reports the findings from this question. *Queensland University of Technology.

resultsThe survey was completed by 641 staff and students. There were 351 responses to the final question. Five inductive themes emerged about smoking on campus during the implementation of a smoke-free policy: 1) the watering down of the policy, if it is not enforced, 2) the creation of hot spots on campus boundaries affecting those who pass by, 3) concern, especially by those who don't smoke, about the impact on smokers emotional health and welfare, 4) disagreement about the value of designated smoking areas and 5) suggestions about how to better implement the policy.

conclusionOverall, participants views about smoking on campus during the implementation of a smoke free policy suggest broad agreement but reflect concerns about enforcement, boundaries, non-smokers and designated areas. Consistent and systematic processes for implementation, maintenance and enforcement of policy goals, and cessation support, is needed to create a non-smoking culture on university campuses.

Indexed as

Smoke-Free PolicyUniversitiesAttitude to HealthCigarette SmokingCross-Sectional StudiesEducational PersonnelFemaleHumansMaleQueenslandSmoking PreventionStudentsSurveys and QuestionnairesTobacco Smoke PollutionTobacco UseTobacco Smoke Pollution

Identifiers

PMID32817644
PMCPMC7440621

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.