ArticleCureus2025
Compliance With the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA) 2003 in Deoghar, Jharkhand: A Cross-Sectional Study in a Pilgrimage Town of Eastern India.
Article in Cureus, 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIndia faces a mounting public health burden from tobacco use, with over a million annual deaths. The Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act (COTPA) 2003 regulates tobacco control, but compliance in pilgrimage-based semi-urban towns remains under-researched. This study assessed COTPA adherence in public settings of Deoghar, Jharkhand, India.
methodsA cross-sectional observational survey was conducted at 50 purposively selected public sites, educational institutions, health facilities, religious places, public transport hubs, and libraries using a structured checklist. Compliance with COTPA sections 4 (smoke-free public places), 5 (advertising ban), 6a (sale to/by minors), 6b (sale near educational institutions), and 7 to 9 (packaging and labeling) was evaluated. Data were summarized as frequencies and percentages; 95% confidence intervals were estimated for non-compliance.
resultsOverall non-compliance was highest for section 4 (26/50, 52.0%) and section 6b (10/24, 41.7%). Smoking occurred frequently in transport hubs, libraries, and religious places. Violations regarding sales to minors were present in 8/50 (16.0%) of sites, and tobacco sales within 100 yards of schools in 10/24 (41.7%) of educational institutions. Section 5 violations (advertisement) were seen in 3/50 (6.0%) of sites. Of the 28 sites that sold smokeless tobacco products, 26/28 (92.8%) had no warning pictures printed on the package, in violation of section 7(1). Sections 7.5 (1/28, 3.6%), 8.1 (0/28, 0.0%), and 9.2 (0/28, 0.0%) showed low or no violations.
conclusionThe enforcement of the COTPA in Deoghar is suboptimal, especially in high-footfall and community settings. Enhanced monitoring, awareness drives, and integration of tobacco control into existing health programs are needed to promote sustained compliance.
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.