Some context for understanding the place of the general educational development degree in the relationship between educational attainment and smoking prevalence

Is the Health of Older Americans With a GED Equivalent to Their Peers With a High School Diploma?

The aim of this study was to identify differences in the prevalence and odds of cognitive impairment, hearing impairment, vision impairment, limitations in activities of daily living (ADLs), and ambulation limitations among three groups of older American adults: high school dropouts, General Educational Development (GED) recipients, and high school graduates. This study used secondary analysis of the nationally representative 2017 American Community Survey. The sample included 20,489 GED recipients, 154,892 high school graduates, and 49,912 high school dropouts. Our findings indicate that there is a gradient in health outcomes among older Americans, with the highest prevalence and odds of cognitive impairment, hearing impairment, vision impairment, ADL limitations, and ambulation limitations among high school dropouts, followed by GED recipients, and the lowest among high school graduates. Although GED recipients have better health outcomes than high school dropouts, there is still a significant disparity in health status between GED recipients and high school graduates.

Smoking Behaviors of General Educational Development (GED) Recipients

OBJECTIVE

Cigarette smoking is inversely associated with education, and despite this gradient effect, individuals with a General Educational Development (GED) diploma, obtained through a high school equivalency test, have the highest smoking prevalence. Considered the high school equivalency credential, it is unclear why individuals with a GED have a substantially higher smoking prevalence compared to high school graduates and dropouts. We conducted a qualitative study to understand life experiences, tobacco use patterns, and perceptions of tobacco among GED smokers and attitudes and behaviors around smoking cessation.

METHODS

We recruited 40 GED smokers aged 18 to 35 years and conducted surveys and semi-structured individual interviews. Transcripts were independently coded, then coding differences were resolved and reviewed by a third team member. We independently determined themes within and between codes and met to determine final themes.

RESULTS

GED recipients had many early life experiences and characteristics that made them highly vulnerable to tobacco dependence. With perceived high cognitive abilities, GED smokers were knowledgeable of many evidence-based smoking cessation strategies and were aware of health risks. Health risks and the financial burden of smoking were motivation to quit. The majority were uninterested or lacked confidence that nicotine replacement therapy, medications, counseling, or the quitline could help them quit. Nearly all were enthusiastic and confident that financial incentives had the potential to help them quit.

CONCLUSIONS

Research is needed to determine whether financial incentives could improve smoking cessation outcomes in this unique population with an unequal burden of smoking.

Comparing participant estimated demand intensity on the cigarette Purchase Task to consumption when usual-brand cigarettes were provided free

Accumulating evidence suggests that the hypothetical Cigarette Purchase Task (CPT), especially its demand Intensity index (i.e., estimated cigarettes participants would smoke if free), is associated with individual differences in smoking risk. Nevertheless, few studies have examined the extent to which hypothetical CPT demand Intensity may differ from consumption when participants are provided with free cigarettes. That topic is the overarching focus of the present study. Participants were 745 adult smokers with co-morbid psychiatric conditions or socioeconomic disadvantage. CPT was administered for usual-brand cigarettes prior to providing participants with seven days of their usual-brand cigarettes free of cost and consumption was recorded daily via an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) System. Demand Intensity was correlated with IVR smoking rate (rs 0.670-0.696, ps < 0.001) but estimates consistently exceeded IVR smoking rates by an average of 4.4 cigarettes per day (ps < 0.001). Importantly, both measures were comparably sensitive to discerning well-established differences in smoking risk, including greater cigarettes per day among men versus women (F(1,732) = 18.74, p < 0.001), those with versus without opioid-dependence (F(1,732) = 168.37, p < 0.001), younger versus older adults (F(2,730) = 32.93, p < 0.001), and those with lower versus greater educational attainment (F(1,732) = 38.26, p < 0.001). Overall, CPT demand Intensity appears to overestimate consumption rates relative to those observed when participants are provided with free cigarettes, but those deviations are systematic (i.e., consistent in magnitude and direction, Fs all <1.63; ps > 0.19 for all interactions with subgroups). This suggests that demand Intensity was sensitive to established group differences in smoking rate, supporting its utility as an important measure of addiction potential.

Research on Youth and Young Adult Tobacco Use, 2013-2018, From the Food and Drug Administration-National Institutes of Health Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science

The Tobacco Regulatory Science Program is a collaborative research effort between the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). In 2013, the NIH funded 14 Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science (TCORS), which serve as partners in establishing research, training, and professional development programs to guide FDA. Each of the fourteen TCORS, and two other NIH-funded research programs, the Center for the Evaluation of Nicotine in Cigarettes (CENIC) and the Consortium on Methods Evaluating Tobacco (COMET), pursued specific research themes relevant to FDA's priorities. A key mandate for FDA is to reduce tobacco use among young people. This article is a review of the peer-reviewed research, including published and in-press manuscripts, from the TCORS, CENIC, and COMET, which provides specific data or other findings on youth (ages 10-18 years) and/or young adults (ages 18-34 years), from 2013 to 2018. Citations of all TCORS, CENIC, and COMET articles from September 2013 to December 2017 were collected by the TCORS coordinating center, the Center for Evaluation and Coordination of Training and Research. Additional citations up to April 30, 2018 were requested from the principal investigators. A scoring rubric was developed and implemented to assess study type, primary theme, and FDA priority area addressed by each article. The major subareas and findings from each priority area are presented. There were 766 articles in total, with 258 (34%) focusing on youth and/or young adults. Findings relevant to FDA from this review concern impact analysis, toxicity, health effects, addiction, marketing influences, communications, and behavior.

IMPLICATIONS

The Tobacco Centers of Regulatory Science, CENIC, and COMET have had a high output of scientific articles since 2013. These Centers are unique in that the FDA supports science specifically to guide future regulatory actions. The 258 articles that have focused on youth and/or young adults are providing data for regulatory actions by the FDA related to the key priority areas such as the addictiveness of non-cigarette products, the effects of exposure to electronic cigarette marketing on initiation and cessation, and the impact of flavored products on youth and young adult tobacco use. Future regulations to reduce tobacco use will be guided by the cumulative evidence. These Centers are one innovative mechanism to promote important outcomes to advance tobacco regulatory science.

Examining the high rate of cigarette smoking among adults with a GED

OBJECTIVES

We seek to identify characteristics of GED holders that explain their very high smoking rates compared with high school (HS) graduates.

METHODS

We pooled data from the 2006-2014 National Health Interview Surveys (NHIS) for adults aged 25 and older (n=235,031) to describe cigarette smoking behaviors and smoking history for adults in six education categories, with a focus on comparing GED holders to HS graduates. Logistic regression was used to predict the odds of current cigarette smoking and successful quitting, accounting for demographic, employment, family/sociocultural, mental health, and other potential confounders.

RESULTS

The smoking rate among adults with a GED (44.1%) was more than five times the rate for those with a college degree (8.3%) and almost twice the rate of adults whose highest level of education was a high school diploma (23.6%). GED holders were also more likely to have started smoking before the age of 15 (32.2%) compared with HS graduates (12.2%) (p<0.001). Even after controlling for 23 socio-demographic and health characteristics, GED holders retained significantly higher odds of current smoking compared to HS graduates (OR=1.73; 95% CI: 1.56, 1.93) and significantly lower odds of successful quitting (OR=0.83, 95% CI: 0.73, 0.94).

CONCLUSIONS

GED holders had greater odds of being a current cigarette smoker, regardless of other characteristics that usually explain smoking. Earlier smoking initiation among GED holders, in combination with lower odds of quitting, contributed to their higher current smoking rate.

Editorial: 3rd Special Issue on behavior change, health, and health disparities

This Special Issue of Preventive Medicine (PM) is the 3rd that we have organized on behavior change, health, and health disparities. This is a topic of critical importance to improving U.S. population health. There is broad scientific consensus that personal behaviors such as cigarette smoking, other substance abuse, and physical inactivity/obesity are among the most important modifiable causes of chronic disease and its adverse impacts on population health. Hence, effectively promoting health-related behavior change needs to be a key component of health care research and policy. There is also broad recognition that while these problems extend throughout the population, they disproportionately impact economically disadvantaged populations and other vulnerable populations and represent a major contributor to health disparities. Thus, behavior change represents an essential step in curtailing health disparities, which receives special attention in this 3rd Special Issue. We also devote considerable space to the longstanding challenges of reducing cigarette smoking and use of other tobacco and nicotine delivery products in vulnerable populations, obesity, and for the first time food insecurity. Across each of these topics we include contributions from highly accomplished policymakers and scientists to acquaint readers with recent accomplishments as well as remaining knowledge gaps and challenges.