ReviewBMC public health2023
Defining indicators for the scoping stage of health impact assessment to evaluate tobacco control policy in the city of Beijing.
Review in BMC public health, 2023. 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, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- China is actively implementing health impact assessment legislation.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- Can health impact assessment help tackle commercial determinants of health and support a wellbeing economy?Health promotion international · 2024Review
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 at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionBeijing initiated the nation's most comprehensive tobacco control program that adheres to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. This study aimed to identify a set of indicators for the scoping of an Health Impact Assessment (HIA) to assess this policy.
methodsThis study used a modified Delphi process. It proposed a tobacco control health impact framework based on the Driving forces- Pressure- State- Exposure- Effect- Action model and the Determinants of Health Theory. After a review of current surveillance system and literature, a working group of 13 experts with multidisciplinary background was established to formulate indicator evaluation criteria and conduct indicator scoring. Each indicator was scored by experts according to four evaluation criteria chosen. Indicators that obtained a total score above 80% and with standard error less than 5 were selected as the final set of indicators. Kendall's coefficient of concordance was calculated.
resultsTwenty-three out of 36 indicators were selected. Smoking prevalence, mortality rate, hospital admission rate, tobacco consumption and hospital admission fees of smoking related diseases achieved more than 90% of total scores and ranked as the top five. Kendall's concordance coefficient was 0.218 for all indicators. For all model composition, Kendall's concordance coefficients were statistically significant.
conclusionThis study identified a set of twenty-three indicators for scoping of HIA of a comprehensive tobacco control policy in Beijing based on a tobacco control health impact conceptual framework. The set of indicators achieved high scores and statistically significant consistency and has great potential to promote the evaluation of tobacco control policy in a global city. Further study might use the set of indicators for HIA on tobacco control policy to analyze empirical data.
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.