Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37662972›Full record

ArticleTobacco prevention & cessation2023

Influence of socioeconomics and social marketing on smoking in Thailand: A National Survey in 2017.

Pittaya Thammawongsa, Wongsa Laohasiriwong, Nuttapol Yotha, Ampawan Nonthamat, Nakarin Prasit

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco prevention & cessation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pittaya ThammawongsaFaculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Wongsa LaohasiriwongFaculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Nuttapol YothaFaculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Ampawan NonthamatBangkok Hospital KhonKaen, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Nakarin PrasitFaculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
Khon Kaen University · TH

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionSmoking is one of the risk factors for noncommunicable diseases and is harmful to both active and passive smokers. This study aimed to identify the influence of socioeconomic and environmental issues on smoking in Thailand.

methodsThe study is a secondary dataset analysis of cross-sectional data using data from the 2017 Smoking and Drinking Behaviors Survey of the National Statistical Office of Thailand. The survey collected the data among 88689 participants using a structured questionnaire. The multi-level analysis was used to identify the association between socioeconomics, environmental factors, social marketing, and smoking while controlling for the effects of covariates and presenting the adjusted odds ratio (AOR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI).

resultsAmong 88689 respondents, the prevalence of smoking was 18.2% (95% CI: 18.00-18.51). Factors that were associated with smoking were: exposure to secondhand smoke in residential settings (AOR=15.31; 95% CI: 14.47-16.20) and alcohol regular drinking (AOR=4.44; 95% CI: 4.14-4.76). In addition, social marketing factors include: disagreeing or being unsure of the opinions that cigarettes should be categorized as harmful goods (AOR=3.15; 95% CI: 2.94-3.37); not having been exposed to the disadvantages of smoking in social media (AOR=1.51; 95% CI: 1.43-1.61); not having been exposed to the disadvantages of smoking in newspapers, television, radio, advertisements, or other sources (AOR=1.46; 95% CI: 1.37-1.62); having never seen the warning cautions or having seen them but ignored the hazardous effect (AOR=4.81; 95% CI: 4.5-4.9); and having ever seen the warning cautions/ever seen but ignore the hazardous effect (AOR=4.81; 95% CI: 4.54-5.09), and ever seen advertisements or billboards which motivate smoking in various places (AOR=1.33; 95% CI: 1.24-1.42).

conclusionsSmoking and secondhand smoke are crucial problems that affect health. In addition, related sectors should help to develop a policy recommendation to reduce the smoking rate through social marketing. Strict and comprehensive policies and laws on non-smoking in work places, public spaces, and homes, will help to reduce secondhand smoke exposure among non-smokers.

Indexed as

alcohol advertisementsmoking behaviorsocial marketing

Identifiers

PMID37662972
PMCPMC10472295
OpenAlexW4386373339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.