1
|
Ahuja N, Mahmood A, Kedia S, Dillon PJ. Predictors of U.S. Adults' Opinion Toward an R-Rating Policy for Movies With Cigarette Smoking. HEALTH EDUCATION & BEHAVIOR 2024; 51:573-582. [PMID: 38519853 DOI: 10.1177/10901981241239933] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/25/2024]
Abstract
Recently, multiple health organizations and advocacy groups have pushed for giving an R-rating for movies depicting tobacco imagery. This study examined several predictors of U.S. adults' opinion toward an R-rating policy for movies depicting cigarette smoking. We used data from the Health Information National Trends Survey (2020 cycle), for a nationally representative sample of 3,865 US adults (aged ≥ 18). The outcome variable was opinion toward an R-rating policy (support, neutral, and oppose) for movies depicting cigarette smoking. A weighted adjusted multinomial logistic regression analysis with comparisons of support versus oppose, support versus neutral, and neutral versus oppose was performed. About 48.2% of respondents were supportive of, 31.1% were neutral toward, and 20.7% were opposed to an R-rating policy. Adults aged 50 to 64 years (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.28, p = .008) and ≥65 years (aOR = 4.54, p <.001) (vs. 18-34 years) were more likely to support the R-rating policy than oppose it. Non-Hispanic Black respondents (vs. non-Hispanic Whites) were 1.74 times more likely to support than oppose the policy (aOR = 1.74, p = .04), whereas adults with a household annual income of US$75,000 or more (vs. <$20,000) and those with moderate (vs. liberal) political viewpoints were more likely to be neutral than oppose the policy. Former and current e-cigarette users (vs. never users) were less likely to support than oppose the policy. Tailored messaging addressing the rationale behind R-rating policy should be directed towards communities based on age, race/ethnicity, household income, e-cigarette usage, and political ideologies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nikhil Ahuja
- Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania, Slippery Rock, PA, USA
| | - Asos Mahmood
- The University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis, TN, USA
| | - Satish Kedia
- The University of Memphis School of Public Health, Memphis, TN, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Glasgow TE, Miller CA, McGuire KP, Freudenberger DC, Fuemmeler BF. Support for cancer prevention public health policies: results from a nationally representative sample of residents in the United States. Transl Behav Med 2022; 12:1124-1132. [PMID: 35972325 PMCID: PMC9802572 DOI: 10.1093/tbm/ibac056] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/21/2023] Open
Abstract
Assessing public support of health policies designed to reduce cancer risk is important for policy implementation. This study aimed to identify support for cancer prevention policies and factors associated with support. Data were obtained from the Health Information National Trends Survey. Support for three types of cancer prevention policies were evaluated: tobacco, alcohol, and junk food regulations. Linear and logistic regression analyses were employed to assess the relationship between support for the different types of policies and sociodemographic, lifestyle behaviors, and cancer beliefs. Certain policies, such as providing warning labels on cigarettes (69.9% support) and requiring specific health warnings on alcohol containers (65.1% support), were popular. Banning outdoor advertising of alcohol was not popular (34.4% support). There were individual differences associated with policy support. For example, respondents who were 75 years or older (B = 0.61, p < .001) or female (B = 0.14, p < .008) were more likely to support tobacco polices compared to their counterparts (i.e., younger or male). Respondents who identified as politically conservative (B = -0.20, p < .004) or those who endorsed high cancer fatalistic beliefs (e.g., there's not much you can do to lower your chances of getting cancer, B = -0.07, p < .012) were less likely to support alcohol policies compared to those who were liberal or had lower cancer fatalistic beliefs. Generally, support was high for most policy questions. However, support varied by different individual factors. The findings also highlight that there may be opportunities to increase understanding and awareness about cancer prevention policies, especially among some segments of the population.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Trevin E Glasgow
- Department of Health Behavior and Policy, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Carrie A Miller
- Department of Health Behavior and Policy, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Kandace P McGuire
- Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Devon C Freudenberger
- Department of Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA
| | - Bernard F Fuemmeler
- Department of Health Behavior and Policy, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Nogueira SO, Driezen P, Fu M, Hitchman SC, Tigova O, Castellano Y, Kyriakos CN, Zatoński MZ, Mons U, Quah ACK, Demjén T, Trofor AC, Przewozniak K, Katsaounou P, Fong G, Vardavas CI, Fernández E. Beyond the European Union Tobacco Products Directive: smokers' and recent quitters' support for further tobacco control measures (2016-2018). Tob Control 2022; 31:765-769. [PMID: 33727255 DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-056177] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2020] [Revised: 02/15/2021] [Accepted: 02/23/2021] [Indexed: 11/03/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several measures recommended by the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control have not been implemented in the European Union, despite changes in the legislation such as the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD). This study aims to understand smokers' and recent quitters' levels of support for tobacco control measures that go beyond the TPD during and after its implementation. METHODS Data from wave 1 (2016, n=6011) and wave 2 (2018, n=6027) of the EUREST-PLUS International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Project Six European Countries Survey, a cohort of adult smokers in Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Spain were used to estimate the level of support for seven different tobacco control measures, overall and by country. RESULTS In 2018, the highest support was for implementing measures to further regulate tobacco products (50.5%) and for holding tobacco companies accountable for the harm caused by smoking (48.8%). Additionally, in 2018, 40% of smokers and recent quitters supported a total ban on cigarettes and other tobacco products within ten years, if assistance to quit smoking is provided. Overall, support for tobacco control measures among smokers and recent quitters after the implementation of the TPD remained stable over time. CONCLUSION There is considerable support among smokers and recent quitters for tobacco control measures that go beyond the current measures implemented. A significant percentage of smokers would support a ban on tobacco products in the future if the government provided assistance to quit smoking. This highlights the importance of implementing measures to increase smoking cessation in conjunction with other policies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah O Nogueira
- Tobacco Control Unit, Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Programme, Institut Catala d' Oncologia (ICO), L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Catalunya, Spain
- School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain
- Tobacco Control Research Group, Epidemiology and Public Health Programme (EPIBELL), Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica Mèdica (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
| | - Pete Driezen
- Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
- School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
| | - Marcela Fu
- Tobacco Control Unit, Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Programme, Institut Catala d' Oncologia (ICO), L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Catalunya, Spain
- School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain
- Tobacco Control Research Group, Epidemiology and Public Health Programme (EPIBELL), Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica Mèdica (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Respiratory Diseases (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain
| | - Sara C Hitchman
- Department of Addictions, King's College London, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, London, UK
| | - Olena Tigova
- Tobacco Control Unit, Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Programme, Institut Catala d' Oncologia (ICO), L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Catalunya, Spain
- School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain
- Tobacco Control Research Group, Epidemiology and Public Health Programme (EPIBELL), Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica Mèdica (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Respiratory Diseases (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain
| | - Yolanda Castellano
- Tobacco Control Unit, Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Programme, Institut Catala d' Oncologia (ICO), L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Catalunya, Spain
- School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain
- Tobacco Control Research Group, Epidemiology and Public Health Programme (EPIBELL), Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica Mèdica (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Respiratory Diseases (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain
| | - Christina N Kyriakos
- Department of Primary Care and Public Health, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, London, UK
- European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention, Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Mateusz Zygmunt Zatoński
- Tobacco Control Research Group, Department for Health, University of Bath, Bath, UK
- Health Promotion Foundation, Warsaw, Poland
- Institute - European Observatory of Health Inequalities, Calisia University, Kalisz, Poland
| | - Ute Mons
- Heart Center, Faculty of Medicine and University Hospital Cologne, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- Cancer Prevention Unit and WHO Collaborating Centre for Tobacco Control, German Cancer Research Centre, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Anne C K Quah
- Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
| | - Tibor Demjén
- Smoking or Health Hungarian Foundation, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Antigona Carmen Trofor
- University of Medicine and Pharmacy 'Grigore T. Popa' Iasi, Iasi, Romania
- Aer Pur Romania, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Krzysztof Przewozniak
- Health Promotion Foundation, Warsaw, Poland
- Maria Sklodowska-Curie National Research Institute of Oncology, Warsaw, Poland
- Collegium Civitas, Warsaw, Poland
| | - Paraskevi Katsaounou
- Pulmonary and Critical Care Department, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Geoffrey Fong
- Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
- School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
| | - Constantine I Vardavas
- European Network for Smoking and Tobacco Prevention, Brussels, Brussels, Belgium
- Laboratory of Toxicology, School of Medicine, University of Crete, Heraklion, Crete, Greece
| | - Esteve Fernández
- Tobacco Control Unit, Cancer Epidemiology and Prevention Programme, Institut Catala d' Oncologia (ICO), L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Catalunya, Spain
- School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Catalunya, Spain
- Tobacco Control Research Group, Epidemiology and Public Health Programme (EPIBELL), Institut d'Investigació Biomèdica Mèdica (IDIBELL), Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
- Consortium for Biomedical Research in Respiratory Diseases (CIBERES), Madrid, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Howse E, Cullerton K, Grunseit A, Bohn-Goldbaum E, Bauman A, Freeman B. Measuring public opinion and acceptability of prevention policies: an integrative review and narrative synthesis of methods. Health Res Policy Syst 2022; 20:26. [PMID: 35246170 PMCID: PMC8895540 DOI: 10.1186/s12961-022-00829-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/07/2021] [Accepted: 02/15/2022] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
Acceptability of and public support for prevention are an important part of facilitating policy implementation. This review aims to identify, summarize and synthesize the methods and study designs used to measure and understand public opinion, community attitudes and acceptability of strategies to prevent chronic noncommunicable disease (NCDs) in order to allow for examination of imbalances in methodological approaches and gaps in content areas. We searched four scientific databases (CINAHL, Embase, Ovid/MEDLINE and Scopus) for peer-reviewed, English-language studies published between January 2011 and March 2020 in high-income, democratic countries across North America, Europe and the Asia–Pacific region. Studies were included if they focused on opinions, attitudes and acceptability of primary prevention strategies and interventions addressing the key NCD risk factors of alcohol use, unhealthy diet, overweight/obesity, tobacco use and smoking, and physical inactivity. A total of 293 studies were included. Two thirds of studies (n = 194, 66%) used quantitative methods such as cross-sectional studies involving surveys of representative (n = 129, 44%) or convenience (n = 42, 14%) samples. A smaller number of studies used qualitative methods (n = 60, 20%) such as focus groups (n = 21, 7%) and interviews (n = 21, 7%). Thirty-nine studies (13%) used mixed methods such as content analysis of news media (n = 17, 6%). Tobacco control remains the dominant topic of public opinion literature about prevention (n = 124, 42%). Few studies looked solely at physical inactivity (n = 17, 6%). The results of this review suggest that public opinion and acceptability of prevention in the peer-reviewed literature is investigated primarily through cross-sectional surveys. Qualitative and mixed methods may provide more nuanced insights which can be used to facilitate policy implementation of more upstream strategies and policies to prevent NCDs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Eloise Howse
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia. .,Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
| | - Katherine Cullerton
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia.,School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia
| | - Anne Grunseit
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia.,Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Erika Bohn-Goldbaum
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia.,Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Adrian Bauman
- The Australian Prevention Partnership Centre, Sax Institute, Sydney, Australia.,Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Becky Freeman
- Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Moshammer H, Poteser M, Weitensfelder L. COVID-19: Regional Differences in Austria. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2022; 19:1644. [PMID: 35162665 PMCID: PMC8835493 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19031644] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/13/2021] [Revised: 01/21/2022] [Accepted: 01/28/2022] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
In the turbulent year 2020, overshadowed by the global COVID-19 pandemic, Austria experienced multiple waves of increased case incidence. While governmental measures to curb the numbers were based on current knowledge of infection risk factors, a retrospective analysis of incidence and lethality at the district level revealed correlations of relative infection risk with socioeconomic, geographical, and behavioral population parameters. We identified unexpected correlations between political orientation and smoking behavior and COVID-19 infection risk and/or mortality. For example, a decrease in daily smokers by 2.3 percentage points would be associated with an increase in cumulative incidence by 10% in the adjusted model, and an increase in voters of the right-wing populist party by 1.6 percentage points with an increase in cumulative mortality by 10%. While these parameters are apparently only single elements of complex causal chains that finally lead to individual susceptibility and vulnerability levels, our findings might have identified ecological parameters that can be utilized to develop fine-tuned communications and measures in upcoming challenges of this and other pandemics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hanns Moshammer
- Department of Environmental Health, Center for Public Health, Medical University Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria; (H.M.); (M.P.)
- Department of Hygiene, Medical University of Karakalpakstan, Nukus 230100, Uzbekistan
| | - Michael Poteser
- Department of Environmental Health, Center for Public Health, Medical University Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria; (H.M.); (M.P.)
| | - Lisbeth Weitensfelder
- Department of Environmental Health, Center for Public Health, Medical University Vienna, 1090 Vienna, Austria; (H.M.); (M.P.)
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Anderson A. Analysing incompliant attitudes towards antibiotic prescription completion in the UK. J Antimicrob Chemother 2021; 75:756-763. [PMID: 31800084 PMCID: PMC7021095 DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkz492] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/21/2019] [Revised: 10/14/2019] [Accepted: 10/28/2019] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Objectives To analyse demographic, social and geographic predictors of incompliant attitudes towards prescription completion in the UK. Methods Two waves of the Eurobarometer survey (85.1 and 90.1) were analysed, with a final sample size of 2016. Using logistic regression, the best-fitting combination of a set of identified variables was specified. The regression output and the model-averaged importance of each variable were analysed. Results Compared with a median prevalence region, respondents in the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS) 1 London (OR = 2.358, 95% CI = 1.100–5.398) and Scotland (OR = 2.418, 95% CI = 1.083–5.693) regions were most likely to report an incompliant attitude. Respondents who correctly answered questions about whether unnecessary use of antibiotics could make them ineffective in future (OR = 0.353, 95% CI = 0.230–0.544), whether antibiotics kill viruses (OR = 0.644, 95% CI = 0.450–0.919) and whether antibiotics treat colds (OR = 0.412, 95% CI = 0.287–0.591) were less likely to report incompliant attitudes. Conversely, respondents who correctly responded that antibiotics can cause side effects (OR = 1.419, 95% CI = 1.014–1.999) were more likely to report incompliant attitudes. There was some evidence of associations between political orientation and level of compliance. Uncooperative survey respondents (OR = 2.001, 95% CI = 1.108–3.526) were more likely to report incompliant attitudes. Conclusions Incompliant attitudes towards antibiotic prescription compliance in the UK are associated with a variety of factors, including regional geographic variation in attitudes. Knowledge about antibiotics can relate to good stewardship attitudes, but concerns over side effects are associated with poor attitudes. Further research should examine the underlying attitudes and beliefs that political orientation may be a marker for in the context of antibiotic stewardship. Survey samples reliant on self-selection are likely to be biased towards good stewardship.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alistair Anderson
- School of Geographical Sciences, University of Bristol, University Road, Bristol BS8 1SS, UK
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Czaplicki L, Schillo B, Rose SW, Zhou Y, Vallone D. National Support for a Menthol Cigarette Sales Ban. Public Health Rep 2020; 136:183-191. [PMID: 33166487 DOI: 10.1177/0033354920966004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022] Open
Abstract
OBJECTIVES The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and local jurisdictions have different authorities to regulate menthol cigarettes, and a growing number of localities and the FDA are considering these policy options. The objective of this study was to update previous research on public support for a menthol ban, including examining differences in support by demographic factors, geographic region, and smoking status. METHODS We assessed policy support among a cross-sectional sample of 2871 adults aged 18-64 from a nationally representative online panel. We calculated weighted estimates of support by demographic factors, political ideology, region (Northeast, Midwest, South, West), and smoking status (never, former, current nonmenthol, current menthol). We used weighted adjusted logistic regression analysis to examine correlates of support for a menthol ban. RESULTS Overall, 56.4% (95% CI, 54.4%-58.3%) of participants supported a government policy to ban menthol cigarette sales. Support was significantly higher among women than among men (62.5% vs 50.1%; P < .001); among Hispanic/Latino (69.3%), non-Hispanic African American (60.5%), and non-Hispanic other (65.8%) people than among non-Hispanic White people (50.4%; P < .001); and among never (64.8%) and former (47.0%) smokers than among current nonmenthol cigarette smokers (30.1%; P < .001). A significant proportion (28.5%; P < .001) of current menthol cigarette smokers supported a ban. After controlling for other factors, geographic region was not significantly associated with support for a ban. CONCLUSIONS Efforts are needed to further increase support for a ban among current menthol cigarette smokers. These findings can be used to assist policy makers and communities in efforts to ban menthol cigarettes in their jurisdictions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Lauren Czaplicki
- 531118 Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA
- Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Barbara Schillo
- 531118 Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Shyanika W Rose
- 531118 Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA
- Department of Behavioral Science College of Medicine and the Center for Health Equity Transformation, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
| | - Yitong Zhou
- 531118 Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Donna Vallone
- 531118 Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA
- Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
- College of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Czaplicki L, Simpson R, Zhou Y, Patel M, Cuccia AF, Vallone DM, Schillo BA. Public Support for E-Cigarette-related Policies among a Nationally Representative Sample of US Adults. Tob Use Insights 2020; 13:1179173X20959700. [PMID: 33100830 PMCID: PMC7549073 DOI: 10.1177/1179173x20959700] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/17/2019] [Accepted: 08/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: The wide availability of flavored e-cigarettes and broad use of e-cigarettes
in public places may contribute to the rapidly increasing rates of use among
youth and young adults in the U.S. However, policies at the federal, state
and local levels can address these factors. Objective: Assess public support for 5 e-cigarette-related policies and evaluate
response patterns by demographics, tobacco use, e-cigarette harm
perceptions, geographic region, and strength of state-level clean indoor air
policies. Methods: Data were collected Oct-Dec 2018 from a nationally representative online
panel of U.S. adults (n = 3211). We measured support for 5 policies: (1) a
ban on the sale flavored e-cigarettes; (2) requiring tobacco products, like
e-cigarettes, be kept out of view in stores where adolescents shop; and
prohibiting e-cigarette use in (3) all public places; (4) restaurants; and
(5) bars. Weighted, adjusted logistic regressions modeled variation in
policy support. Results: A majority of respondents (63.3%) supported a flavor ban, with no differences
in support by smoking status. Most respondents supported keeping tobacco
products out of view (78.0%) and prohibiting e-cigarette use in indoor
public places (82.9%), restaurants (86.5%), and bars (76.1%). In the
adjusted models, current e-cigarette users had significantly lower odds of
policy support compared to never users. We observed no differences in
support by geographic region or strength of state-level clean indoor air
policies. Conclusion: Results suggest high levels of public support to regulate e-cigarette
flavors, marketing, and use in public places. Targeted messaging may be
needed to increase support among current e-cigarette users.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Randall Simpson
- Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Yitong Zhou
- Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Minal Patel
- Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Alison F Cuccia
- Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Donna M Vallone
- Schroeder Institute at Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA.,College of Global Public Health, New York University, New York, NY, USA.,Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Castanié S, Munoz Sastre MT, Kpanake L, Mullet E. Mapping and comparing French people's positions regarding restrictive control policies: a pilot study. Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy 2020; 15:25. [PMID: 32192501 PMCID: PMC7082909 DOI: 10.1186/s13011-020-00267-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/06/2019] [Accepted: 03/10/2020] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Public authorities resort to various control policies in order to curb the prevalence of unhealthy behaviors. As these policies can only succeed to the extent that people agree with them, this study mapped French people's positions regarding restrictive control policies in general. METHOD A sample of 344 adults (among them health professionals and lawyers) were presented with 54 vignettes depicting a control policy. Each vignette contained four pieces of information: the type of addictive behavior targeted (smoking, drinking, or gambling), the nature of preventive measures (e.g., information campaigns), the degree of regulative measures (e.g., prohibition to minors), and the severity of sanctions. RESULTS Through cluster analysis, eight qualitatively different positions were found: Never acceptable (9%), Weak or moderate regulation (5%), Moderate regulation associated with strong prevention (11%), Strong or moderate regulation (11%), Strong regulation in association with strong prevention (23%), Moderate sanctions in association with strong prevention and moderate regulation (9%), Severe sanctions (9%), and Always acceptable (9%). Some participants (14%) expressed no opinion at all. CONCLUSION French people's positions regarding control policies were extremely diverse. Regarding tobacco, however, one type of policy would likely be supported by a majority of people: Moderate regulation associated with at least a moderate level of prevention and low-level sanctions. Regarding alcohol, an acceptable position would be: Moderate regulation associated with at least a moderate level of prevention and high-level sanctions. Regarding gambling, an acceptable position would be: Strong regulation associated with at least a moderate level of prevention and low-level sanctions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sylvie Castanié
- CERPPS, Maison de la recherche, Federal University of Toulouse, 5 allées Antonio Machado, 31058 Toulouse, cedex 9 France
| | - Maria Teresa Munoz Sastre
- CERPPS, Maison de la recherche, Federal University of Toulouse, 5 allées Antonio Machado, 31058 Toulouse, cedex 9 France
| | - Lonzozou Kpanake
- University of Québec – TELUQ, 5800, rue Saint-Denis, Bureau 1105, Montréal, Québec H2S 3L5 Canada
| | - Etienne Mullet
- Institute of Advanced Studies (EPHE), 17 bis, rue Quefes, Plaisance du Touch, 31830 Paris, France
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Hahn EJ, Ickes MJ, Wiggins A, Kay Rayens M, Polivka BJ, Whelan Parento E. Short- and Long-Term Effects of a Tobacco-Free Executive Order on Employee Tobacco Use. Policy Polit Nurs Pract 2019; 20:74-81. [PMID: 30922206 DOI: 10.1177/1527154419833174] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Smoke-free workplace policies encourage cessation, reduce tobacco consumption, and shift the pro-tobacco norm. However, no research exists evaluating the impact of mandated tobacco-free policies on government property. The purpose of our study was to examine short- and long-term effects of a tobacco-free policy (executive order 2014-747) implemented in November 2014, prohibiting tobacco use on state executive property. Cross-sectional online surveys were administered at two time points to a total of 27,000 employees of the executive branch of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The short-term evaluation (March 2015) comprised 4,170 employees and the long term (August 2015) included 3,070. Tobacco use, plans to quit using tobacco, personal characteristics, whether the county of their workplace was covered by a smoke-free policy, and social norms for tobacco use were assessed 4- and 9-month post-policy implementation. Current tobacco use and plans to quit were compared between short- and long-term evaluations using multiple logistic regression with relevant covariates included. Controlling for demographics and employment location, employees reported lower rates of tobacco use and higher rates of planning to quit in the long term than in the short term. Tobacco-free policies reduce tobacco use prevalence and promote plans to quit, particularly over time. We found differences in tobacco use prevalence and plans to quit using tobacco products from 4 to 9 months after the policy took effect, as reported by employees following implementation of the tobacco-free policy. These findings support the potential for avoiding long-term health care costs as a result of reduced tobacco use from these policies. Nurses can play an important advocacy and policy evaluation role to promote and assess the impact of tobacco-free policies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ellen J Hahn
- 1 College of Nursing, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
| | - Melinda J Ickes
- 2 Department of Kinesiology and Health Promotion, College of Education, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
| | - Amanda Wiggins
- 1 College of Nursing, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
| | - Mary Kay Rayens
- 1 College of Nursing, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Vardavas CI, Bécuwe N, Demjén T, Fernández E, McNeill A, Mons U, Tountas Y, Trofor AC, Tsatsakis A, Rohde G, Willemsen M, Przewozniak K, Zatonski WA, Fong GT. Study Protocol of European Regulatory Science on Tobacco (EUREST-PLUS): Policy implementation to reduce lung disease. Tob Induc Dis 2018; 16:A2. [PMID: 31516458 PMCID: PMC6659480 DOI: 10.18332/tid/93305] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/02/2018] [Revised: 07/10/2018] [Accepted: 07/12/2018] [Indexed: 11/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Efforts to mitigate the devastation of tobacco-attributable morbidity and mortality in the European Union (EU) are founded on its newly adopted Tobacco Products Directive (TPD) along with the first-ever health treaty, the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The aim of this Horizon 2020 Project entitled European Regulatory Science on Tobacco: Policy Implementation to Reduce Lung Disease (EURESTPLUS) is to monitor and evaluate the impact of the implementation of the TPD across the EU, within the context of WHO FCTC ratification. To address this aim, EUREST-PLUS consists of four objectives: 1) To create a cohort study of 6000 adult smokers in six EU MS (Germany, Greece, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Spain) within a pre-TID vs post-TPD implementation study design; 2) To conduct secondary dataset analyses of the Special Eurobarometer on Tobacco Survey (SETS); 3) To document changes in e-cigarette product parameters (technical design, labelling/packaging and chemical composition) pre-TID vs post-TPD; and 4) To enhance innovative joint research collaborations on chronic non-communicable diseases. Through this methodological approach, EUREST-PLUS is designed to generate strong inferences about the effectiveness of tobacco control policies, as well as to elucidate the mechanisms and factors by which policy implementation translates to population impact. Findings from EUREST-PLUS have potential global implications for the implementation of innovative tobacco control policies and its impact on the prevention of lung diseases.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Constantine I. Vardavas
- European Network on Smoking and Tobacco Prevention (ENSP), Brussels, Belgium
- University of Crete (UoC), Heraklion, Greece
| | | | - Tibor Demjén
- Smoking or Health Hungarian Foundation (SHHF), Budapest, Hungary
| | - Esteve Fernández
- Institut Català d’Oncologia (ICO) and Bellvitge Biomedical Research Institute (IDIBELL), Catalonia, Spain
- School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universitat de Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain
| | - Ann McNeill
- King’s College London (KCL), London, United Kingdom
| | - Ute Mons
- Cancer Prevention Unit and WHO Collaborating Centre for Tobacco Control, German Cancer Research Center (DKFZ), Heidelberg, Germany
| | | | - Antigona C. Trofor
- University of Medicine and Pharmacy ‘Grigore T. Popa’, Iasi, Romania
- Aer Pur Romania, Bucharest, Romania
| | | | - Gernot Rohde
- European Respiratory Society (ERS), Lausanne, Switzerland
| | - Marc Willemsen
- School CAPHRI, University of Maastricht (UniMaas), Maastricht, The Netherlands
| | | | | | - Geoffrey T. Fong
- University of Waterloo (UW), Waterloo, Canada
- Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Kuijpers TG, Willemsen MC, Kunst AE. Public support for tobacco control policies: The role of the protection of children against tobacco. Health Policy 2018; 122:929-935. [PMID: 29859650 DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2018.05.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2018] [Revised: 05/07/2018] [Accepted: 05/10/2018] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION In many countries, health advocates aim to increase public support for tobacco control policies by framing these policies in terms of child protection. We examined whether support for the protection of children is indeed associated with support for tobacco control policies, even among smokers, opponents of state intervention and opponents of a governmental role in tobacco control. METHODS We used a survey on a representative sample of Dutch adults of 18 years and older (n = 1631). The survey measured respondents' support for banning tobacco displays, raising the age of sale for tobacco to 21 years and limiting tobacco sales to specialized shops. Regression analyses were done to assess the association with respondents' support for the protection of children against tobacco. In further analyses, subgroup interactions were added. RESULTS Respondents' support for the protection of children against tobacco with legislation was positively related to support for all three policies. Associations were weaker for smokers (except for raising the age of sale) but similar for opponents of state intervention and opponents of a governmental role in tobacco control. CONCLUSION This is the first paper to empirically support the idea that emphasizing the need to protect children against tobacco enhances support for tobacco control policies. This 'child effect' is effective in all segments of the population, albeit somewhat weaker among smokers.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Thomas G Kuijpers
- Department of Health Promotion, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Trimbos Institute, Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
| | - Marc C Willemsen
- Department of Health Promotion, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Trimbos Institute, Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Anton E Kunst
- Department of Public Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Boeckmann M, Kotz D, Shahab L, Brown J, Kastaun S. German Public Support for Tobacco Control Policy Measures: Results from the German Study on Tobacco Use (DEBRA), a Representative National Survey. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH AND PUBLIC HEALTH 2018; 15:E696. [PMID: 29642461 PMCID: PMC5923738 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph15040696] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/15/2018] [Revised: 03/15/2018] [Accepted: 03/29/2018] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Abstract
Smoking prevalence in Germany remains high at approximately 28%. We assessed public support for tobacco legislation and associations between level of support and smoking and socio-demographic characteristics. Data from 2087 people were collected as part of the German Study on Tobacco Use ("DEBRA"): a nationally representative, face-to-face household survey. Public support was measured on total ban of sale, raising the minimum age for sales, taxation of tobacco industry sales, research into e-cigarettes, and ban of smoking in cars when children are present. Associations were assessed with multivariate logistic regression. Over 50% of the German population support taxing industry profits (57.3%) and assessing e-cigarettes as an aid to quit smoking (55.5%). Over 40% support raising the legal age of sale (43.1%), and 22.9% support a total ban on tobacco sales. A smoking ban in cars when children are present was most popular (71.5%), even among current smokers (67.0%). There is public support for stricter tobacco control measures in Germany. A smoking ban in cars when children are present could be a feasible policy to implement.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Melanie Boeckmann
- Institute of General Practice, Addiction Research and Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine-University, 40227 Düsseldorf, Germany.
| | - Daniel Kotz
- Institute of General Practice, Addiction Research and Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine-University, 40227 Düsseldorf, Germany.
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
| | - Lion Shahab
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
| | - Jamie Brown
- Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
| | - Sabrina Kastaun
- Institute of General Practice, Addiction Research and Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Medical Faculty of the Heinrich-Heine-University, 40227 Düsseldorf, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|