ArticleBMJ public health2023
Assessing tobacco retailer compliance with flavoured tobacco product sales restrictions: a cross-sectional study of four California cities.
Article in BMJ 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, 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic review investigating policy design and implementation of US state and local policy to restrict the sale of flavored tobacco products.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026Pooled it
- E-Cigarette Directory Laws, Sales, and Product Availability From 3 Early-Adopting US States.JAMA network open · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Governments are passing laws to restrict the sale of flavoured tobacco products (FTPs), but retailer compliance with such policies may vary. This study compared tobacco retailer compliance with local ordinances restricting the sale of FTPs across various localities in Southern California. Methods: Attempts to purchase FTPs from a random sample of tobacco retailers in a convenience sample of four cities in Southern California with FTP sales restrictions were made from June to August 2022. Trained shoppers of legal tobacco purchasing age entered tobacco retailers and purchased prohibited FTPs if they were on display or asked salespersons for menthol cigarettes or a flavoured e-cigarette, completing purchases if they were made available. Results: Among 141 stores, 39.9% of stores were non-compliant with local ordinances. Non-compliance varied by city, occurring in 49.3%, 43.8%, 15.4% and 0% of stores across four cities. The highest proportion of non-compliance was among vape or tobacco shops (91.2%) followed by convenience and liquor stores (36.4%), grocery stores and pharmacies (15.4%), and gas stations (13.5%). Conclusion: Prior to California's statewide sales restriction on flavoured tobacco, compliance with local sales restrictions was variable across cities and store types.
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.