ArticleTobacco control2025
Effects of a federal smoke-free housing policy on adverse birth outcomes among NYC public-housing residents.
Article in Tobacco control, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIdentifying strategies to mitigate the effects of secondhand smoke exposure is crucial for public health. Thus, we estimated the effect of a 2018 federal smoke-free housing (SFH) policy on adverse birth outcomes among New York City (NYC) public-housing residents.
methodsWe obtained data on all live births to NYC residents in NYC from 2013 to 2022, using the borough-block-lot of the birthing person's address to identify births to public-housing residents. We then estimated the effect of the SFH policy on risk of preterm birth or low birth weight among births to NYC public-housing residents using a linear-probability difference-in-differences estimator, weighted by inverse probability weights to increase the plausibility of the parallel-trends assumption.
resultsOur sample included 44 455 births to public-housing residents and 803 648 births to non-public-housing residents. Difference-in-difference analyses suggested the SFH policy did not affect risk of preterm birth (risk difference (RD) per 100: 0.1; 95% CI -0.6 to 0.9) or low birth weight (RD per 100: 0.3, 95% CI -0.4 to 1.0). Event-study analyses supported these findings and lent credibility to the parallel-trends assumption.
conclusionsWe estimated no initial effects of a federal SFH policy on risk of preterm birth or low birth weight among births to NYC public-housing residents.
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.