Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38697660›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2024

Equity implications of tobacco taxation: results from WHO FCTC investment cases.

Garrison Spencer, Rachel Nugent, Nathan Mann, Brian Hutchinson, Carrie Ngongo, Dudley Tarlton, Roy Small, Douglas Webb

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. A systematic review of causal pathways of socioeconomic inequalities in stroke.International journal of stroke : official journal of the International Stroke Society · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors.

Garrison SpencerRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA gspencer@rti.org.ORCID 0000-0002-8312-7482
Rachel NugentRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6421-9077
Nathan MannRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2166-2815
Brian HutchinsonRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1576-5351
Carrie NgongoRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6501-5532
Dudley TarltonUnited Nations Development Programme, Istanbul, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-0584-9030
Roy SmallHIV, Health and Development Group, United Nations Development Programme, New York, New York, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4189-287X
Douglas WebbUnited Nations Development Programme, Amman, Jordan.ORCID 0000-0002-8664-1348

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAcross time, geographies and country income levels, smoking prevalence is highest among people with lower incomes. Smoking causes further impoverishment of those on the lower end of the income spectrum through expenditure on tobacco and greater risk of ill health.

methodsThis paper summarises the results of investment case equity analyses for 19 countries, presenting the effects of increased taxation on smoking prevalence, health and expenditures. We disaggregate the number of people who smoke, smoking-attributable mortality and cigarette expenditures using smoking prevalence data by income quintile. A uniform 30% increase in price was applied across countries. We estimated the effects of the price increase on smoking prevalence, mortality and cigarette expenditures.

resultsIn all but one country (Bhutan), a one-time 30% increase in price would reduce smoking prevalence by the largest percent among the poorest 20% of the population. All income groups in all countries would spend more on cigarettes with a 30% increase in price. However, the poorest 20% would pay an average of 12% of the additional money spent.

conclusionsOur results confirm that health benefits from increases in price through taxation are pro-poor. Even in countries where smoking prevalence is higher among wealthier groups, increasing prices can still be pro-poor due to variable responsiveness to higher prices. The costs associated with higher smoking prevalence among the poor, together with often limited access to healthcare services and displaced spending on basic needs, result in health inequality and perpetuate the cycle of poverty.

Indexed as

CommerceSmokingTaxesTobacco ProductsHealth ExpendituresHumansIncomePovertyPrevalenceSmoking PreventionWorld Health OrganizationAdvocacyDisparitiesEconomicsLow/Middle income countrySocioeconomic status

Identifiers

PMID38697660
PMCPMC11103284

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.