ArticleBMJ open2021
Estimating the equity impacts of the smoking ban in England on cotinine levels: a regression discontinuity design.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo estimate the equity impacts of the 2007 smoking ban in England, for both smokers and non-smokers.
designDoubly robust regression discontinuity analysis of salivary cotinine levels. Conditional average treatment effects were used to estimate differential impacts of the ban by socioeconomic deprivation (based on the Index of Multiple Deprivation). Distributional impacts were further assessed using conditional quantile treatment effects and inequality treatment effects.
settingIn 2007, England introduced a ban on smoking in public places. This had little impact on tobacco consumption by smokers but was associated with decreases in environmental tobacco smoke exposure for non-smokers. However, the impact of the ban on socioeconomic inequalities in exposure is unclear.
participants766 smokers and 2952 non-smokers responding to the Health Survey for England in 2007. OUTCOME MEASURE: Levels of salivary cotinine.
resultsBefore the ban, socioeconomic deprivation was associated with higher cotinine levels for non-smokers but not for smokers. The ban caused a significant reduction in average cotinine levels for non-smokers (p=0.043) but had no effect for smokers (p=0.817). Reductions for non-smokers were greater for more deprived groups with higher levels of exposure, and there was a significant reduction in socioeconomic-related inequality in cotinine. Across the whole population (both smokers and non-smokers), there was no significant increase in the concentration of cotinine levels among the socioeconomically deprived.
conclusionThe 2007 ban on smoking in public places had little impact on smokers, but was, as intended, associated with reductions in both (1) average levels of environmental tobacco smoke exposure and (2) deprivation-related inequality in exposure among non-smokers.
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.