ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2025
Analysis of facilitators of and barriers to enactment of state regulation of indoor tanning by minors.
Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIndoor tanning (IT) causes skin cancers, including potentially deadly melanoma. IT often starts during youth, a critical time for deleterious skin damage. About half of the US states have enacted laws banning IT for minors under age 18. PURPOSE: This study reports qualitative findings from interviews with key informants (KIs) involved in IT legislative efforts to identify/describe factors influencing law enactment, based on the multiple streams framework.
methodsGuided by expert advisors and using snowball-sampling, KIs from 16 states with most recently enacted IT laws regulating minor access and states without restrictions were contacted. In virtual interviews, KIs shared their unique "story" of IT bill efforts, enactment, implementation, impact, and potential future directions, which were transcribed and qualitatively coded by trained staff.
resultsAlthough KI roles (e.g. legislators, advocates, clinicians, and melanoma survivors; n = 64) and legislative processes vary by state, similar facilitators and barriers to IT bill passage were identified: personal stories, advocacy, opposition, preparation, legislator education, economic/enforcement issues, bill stringency, political values/partisanship, and legislative process. Other factors influencing bill enaction included failed Food and Drug Administration attempts toward federally banning minor IT and competing priorities.
conclusionsDespite evidence of laws' impact on minors' IT, policy enaction is challenging and slow. Understanding key facilitators and barriers may help advocates to advance legislation efforts. Advocating for stringent laws necessitates consideration of potential downstream effects. For example, even with policy enactment, KIs believed enforcement and compliance were likely insufficient and variable, with minors continuing to indoor tan, putting them at risk for potentially deadly skin cancer.
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.