ArticleTobacco prevention & cessation2022
Outdoor smoking as a nuisance to non-smokers: The case for smoke-free outdoor public spaces in dense urban areas.
Article in Tobacco prevention & cessation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Investigating current and temporal variation in municipal youth smoking rates in the Netherlands: A multivariable regression analysis.Tobacco induced diseases · 2025Article
- Secondhand smoke exposure in public outdoor spaces in the Netherlands: The stronger the smell, the more exposure to nicotine.Tobacco induced diseases · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite the growing number of smoke-free spaces, many non-smokers continue to be involuntarily exposed to secondhand smoke outdoors and on public streets. Both theory and research suggest that people living in densely populated urban areas are more likely to smoke than those living in less densely populated areas. Consequently, non-smokers in densely populated urban areas might be more likely to be exposed and feel annoyed by secondhand smoke outdoors. We investigated whether the extent to which non-smokers feel annoyed by secondhand smoke exposure in outdoor public spaces is related to urban population density.
methodsWe used cross-sectional survey data from the Netherlands 'Module Substance Use' survey (2020 data, n=9375). This is a nationally representative sample of the adult population in the Netherlands. Using logistic regression models, we investigated whether urban population density predicts both smoking and non-smokers' annoyance to secondhand smoke exposure outdoors.
resultsWe found that smoking rates were associated with urban population density. In the Netherlands, people living in extremely population-dense urban areas were more likely to smoke than those living in non-urban areas (AOR=1.59; 95% CI: 1.25-2.02, p<0.001). Feeling annoyed by secondhand smoke outdoors was also associated with urban population density: non-smokers living in extremely population-dense urban areas were more likely to be annoyed than respondents living in non-urban areas (AOR=1.65; 95% CI: 1.34-2.02, p<0.001).
conclusionsThese cross-sectional data highlight the importance of comprehensive local tobacco control policy programs that include creating smoke-free outdoor public spaces. This need for such smoke-free outdoor public spaces might be particularly strong in densely populated areas.
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.