ArticleEClinicalMedicine2023
Public support for smoke-free policies in outdoor areas and (semi-)private places: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of secondhand smoke on air quality in partially enclosed outdoor hospitality venues: a review.BMC public health · 2024Pooled it
- Multilevel normative tensions under partial outdoor smoke-free policies: A qualitative case study in Seoul, South Korea.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
- Maternal and Indoor Smoking Are Associated with Increased Risk of Acute Respiratory Infection in Under-Five Children: A Meta-Analysis of National Survey Data from Eight Asia-Pacific Countries.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Factors associated with intention to quit smoking in Indonesia: findings from a cross-sectional Global Adult Tobacco Survey.Korean journal of family medicine · 2026Article
- Exposure to second-hand smoke, tobacco advertising, and school curriculum on tobacco harms in South African Adolescents: findings from the Global Youth Tobacco Survey.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2026Article
- European Code Against Cancer, 5th edition - tobacco and nicotine containing products, second-hand smoke, alcohol and cancer.Molecular oncology · 2026Review
- Breaking new ground in tobacco control: student reactions to France's first smoke-free campus.BMC public health · 2025Article
- The Current Situation of Subnational Legislation on Smoking Ban in Indoor Public Places, Indoor Workplaces, and Public Transport - China, 2024.China CDC weekly · 2025Article
- Urban health inequities and healthy longevity: traditional and emerging risk factors across the cities and policy implications.Aging clinical and experimental research · 2025Review
- A Comprehensive Approach to Minimize Secondhand Smoke Exposure in Children to Improve Cardiovascular Health.International journal of preventive medicine · 2025Article
- Cost-effectiveness of smoke-free interventions: A systematic review.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2025Review
- Patterns of tobacco use and related factors among adolescents in South Africa: Insight from the Global Youth Tobacco Survey.Tobacco induced diseases · 2025Article
- Assessing second-hand smoke exposure among non-smoking youth in India: Insights from GATS I & II.The Indian journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Global trends of secondhand smoke exposure among young adolescents from 27 countries, 2003-2021: findings from the World Health Organization database.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Factors Related to Tobacco Cessation Attempts Among Turkish Adolescents: A Structural Equation Model Analysis.Thoracic research and practice · 2024Article
- Towards stronger tobacco control policies to curb the smoking epidemic in Spain.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024Review
- Public support for new tobacco control measures in Poland: A cross-sectional survey 2024.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2024Article
- Public support for smoke-free private indoor and public outdoor areas in the Netherlands: A trend analysis from 2018-2022.Tobacco induced diseases · 2024Article
- Barriers and opportunities for the expansion of smoke- and aerosol-free environment policies in Europe.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2024Article
- Best practices for secondhand smoke and secondhand aerosol protection and evidence supporting the expansion of smoke- and aerosol-free environments: Recommendations from the 2nd Joint Action on Tobacco Control.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Smoke-free policies are essential to protect people against tobacco smoke exposure. To successfully implement smoke-free policies that go beyond enclosed public places and workplaces, public support is important. We undertook a comprehensive systematic review of levels and determinants of public support for indoor (semi-)private and outdoor smoke-free policies. Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, six electronic databases were searched for studies (published between 1 January 2004 and 19 January 2022) reporting support for (semi-)private and outdoor smoke-free policies in representative samples of at least 400 respondents aged 16 years and above. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias of individual reports using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. The primary outcome was proportion support for smoke-free policies, grouped according to location covered. Three-level meta-analyses, subgroup analyses and meta-regression were performed. Findings: 14,749 records were screened, of which 107 were included; 42 had low risk of bias and 65 were at moderate risk. 99 studies were included in the meta-analyses, reporting 326 measures of support from 896,016 individuals across 33 different countries. Support was pooled for indoor private areas (e.g., private cars, homes: 73%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 66-79), indoor semi-private areas (e.g., multi-unit housing: 70%, 95% CI: 48-86), outdoor hospitality areas (e.g., café and restaurant terraces: 50%, 95% CI: 43-56), outdoor non-hospitality areas (e.g., school grounds, playgrounds, parks, beaches: 69%, 95% CI: 64-73), outdoor semi-private areas (e.g., shared gardens: 67%, 95% CI: 53-79) and outdoor private areas (e.g., private balconies: 41%, 95% CI: 18-69). Subcategories showed highest support for smoke-free cars with children (86%, 95% CI: 81-89), playgrounds (80%, 95% CI: 74-86) and school grounds (76%, 95% CI: 69-83). Non-smokers and ex-smokers were more in favour of smoke-free policies compared to smokers. Support generally increased over time, and following implementation of each smoke-free policy. Interpretation: Our findings suggested that public support for novel smoke-free policies is high, especially in places frequented by children. Governments should be reassured about public support for implementation of novel smoke-free policies. Funding: Dutch Heart Foundation, Lung Foundation Netherlands, Dutch Cancer Society, Dutch Diabetes Research Foundation and Netherlands Thrombosis Foundation.
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.