ArticleTobacco control2024
Evolving methodology of national tobacco control investment cases.
Article in Tobacco control, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Facilitators and barriers to implementing smoke-free homes in Armenia: a qualitative study.Global health promotion · 2025Article
- Tobacco control in low-income and middle-income countries: findings from WHO FCTC investment cases.Tobacco control · 2024Article
- Interpreting results, impacts and implications from WHO FCTC tobacco control investment cases in 21 low-income and middle-income countries.Tobacco control · 2024Article
- Advancing progress on tobacco control in low-income and middle-income countries through economic analysis.Tobacco control · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis article describes an investment case methodology for tobacco control that was applied in 36 countries between 2017 and 2022.
methodsThe WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) investment cases compared two scenarios: a base case that calculated the tobacco-attributable mortality, morbidity and economic costs with status quo tobacco control, and an intervention scenario that described changes in those same outcomes from fully implementing and enforcing a variety of proven, evidence-based tobacco control policies and interventions. Health consequences included the tobacco-attributable share of mortality and morbidity from 38 diseases. The healthcare expenditures and the socioeconomic costs from the prevalence of those conditions were combined to calculate the total losses due to tobacco. The monetised benefits of improvements in health resulting from tobacco control implementation were compared with costs of expanding tobacco control to assess returns on investment in each country. An institutional and context analysis assessed the political and economic dimensions of tobacco control in each context.
resultsWe applied a rigorous yet flexible methodology in 36 countries over 5 years. The replicable model and framework may be used to inform development of tobacco control cases in countries worldwide.
conclusionInvestment cases constitute a tool that development partners and advocates have demanded in even greater numbers. The economic argument for tobacco control provided by this set of country-contextualised analyses can be a strong tool for policy change.
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.