ArticlePreventive medicine reports2022
Housing type and secondhand tobacco smoke exposure among non-smoking New York City adults, 2004 and 2013-14.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Secondhand Smoke and Socio-Demographic Associated Factors: Results From the Vietnam Population-Based Provincial Global Adult Tobacco Survey in 2022.Tobacco use insights · 2024Article
- Passive smoking as a risk factor among older adults: an ordered probability approach for Türkiye.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) exposure has declined due to smoking reductions, expanding workplace and public smoke-free air laws, and smoke-free housing policy promotion. Population-based studies examining objective SHS exposure biomarkers have documented reductions over time, however non-smoking urban adults are more likely to have elevated cotinine (a metabolite of nicotine) compared with national averages. Evidence suggests residential housing type may impact urban SHS exposure risk. Direct associations between multiunit housing (MUH) and elevated cotinine have been identified among children but not yet examined among adults. We used data from the cross-sectional 2004 and 2013/14 New York City Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys to investigate associations between MUH (single-family versus 2; 3-99; and 100 + units) and likelihood of elevated serum cotinine among nonsmoking adults (2004: n = 1324; 2013/14: n = 946), adjusting for socio-demographics (sex, age, race/ethnicity, education, income) and self-reported SHS exposure variables. Combined and single-year adjusted multivariable regressions were conducted. Elevated cotinine was defined as a serum level of ≥ 0.05 ng/ml. Combined year adjusted multivariable regression analyses found no difference in elevated cotinine by housing type among non-smoking adults. By survey year, elevated cotinine did not vary by housing type in 2004, while non-smoking adults in 3-99 unit buildings were twice as likely to have elevated cotinine compared with single family residents in 2013/14 (adjusted Odds Ratio = 2.55 (1.13, 5.79)). While SHS exposure has declined, relative burden may be increasing among MUH residents. In urban settings with extensive MUH, attention to housing-based policies and programmatic interventions is critical to reducing SHS exposure.
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.