ArticleBMJ public health2025
Has the impact of cigarette smoking on mortality been underestimated by overlooking second-hand smoke? Tohoku medical megabank community-based cohort study.
Article in BMJ public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Previous studies have assessed the impact of active smoking on mortality using the population-attributable fraction (PAF). However, these studies have not included second-hand smoking (SHS), potentially underestimating smoking's impact. We compared the PAF from active smoking alone with the PAF, including SHS exposure. Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: A community-based cohort study in Japan. Participants: 40 796 participants aged ≥20 years. Main outcome measures: SHS was defined as inhaling someone else's cigarette smoke at the workplace or home in the past year. We classified smoking status and SHS into ten categories: never-smoker without SHS, never-smoker with SHS, past smoker without SHS, past smoker with SHS, current smoker 1-9 cigarettes/day without SHS, current smoker 1-9 cigarettes/day with SHS, 10-19 cigarettes/day without SHS, 10-19 cigarettes/day with SHS, ≥20 cigarettes/day without SHS and ≥20 cigarettes/day with SHS. The main outcome was all-cause mortality. Results: During the median follow-up period of 6.5 (5.7-7.5) years, 788 men and 328 women died. For men, compared with never-smokers without SHS, past smokers without SHS (HR, 1.39 [95% CI, 1.11 to 1.73]) and past smokers with SHS (HR, 1.48 (95% CI, 1.10 to 2.00)) were associated with all-cause mortality. For women, never-smokers with SHS had a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR, 1.36 (95% CI, 1.00 to 1.84)). Without considering SHS, 28.0% and 2.3% of all-cause mortality in men and women, respectively, were attributable to past and current smoking. Including SHS, PAF increased to 31.3% in men and 8.4% in women. Conclusions: We clarified that smoking's impact was underestimated by not accounting for SHS, especially in women. Information on SHS is crucial for understanding smoking's health impact. This study supports the importance of avoiding smoking and preventing SHS.
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.