ArticleTobacco induced diseases2025
Investigating current and temporal variation in municipal youth smoking rates in the Netherlands: A multivariable regression analysis.
Article in Tobacco induced diseases, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionVariations in smoking prevalence rates exist across different regions. While most research tends to study demographic, cultural or social determinants of smoking, few studies have looked into whether municipal-level variables are associated with smoking rates, especially among the younger population. We examined which municipal-level factors explain differences in youth smoking rates in the Netherlands.
methodsWe conducted linear regression analyses to examine municipal-level smoking behavior among the population aged 12-16 years. Main outcomes were the proportion of youth within municipalities that had ever smoked or weekly smoked in 2021, and trend differences in ever smoking and weekly smoking between 2015 and 2021. Independent variables were population density, level of urban density, proportion of people with a migration background, proportion of elderly residents, and proportion of adults with a low level of education. We examined municipalities' involvement in the Smoke-free Generation campaign, their tobacco control policies, the number of smoke-free outdoor areas implemented, and their self-assessed tobacco control scores.
resultsDutch municipalities show great variation in smoking prevalence (2021: ever smoking 3.0-21.8% and weekly smoking 1.4-11.1%). Smoking has decreased in almost all municipalities in recent years; 108 of the 113 municipalities had a decrease in ever smoking, while 89 of the 100 municipalities showed a decrease in weekly smoking prevalence. Municipalities with a higher proportion of individuals with a migration background had lower ever (β= -0.08, p=0.021) and weekly (β= -0.06, p=0.013) youth smoking prevalence rates in 2021.
conclusionsConsidering that municipality-specific variables were not associated with levels of youth smoking prevalence, the question remains why some municipalities have much higher smoking rates than others, after having been exposed to the same national level tobacco control policy measures.
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.