Thomas S, Fayter D, Misso K, Ogilvie D, Petticrew M, Sowden A, Whitehead M, Worthy G
MRC Social and Public Health Sciences Unit, Glasgow G12 8RZ, UK.
Tob Control. 2008 Aug;17(4):230-7. doi: 10.1136/tc.2007.023911. Epub 2008 Apr 21.
To assess the effects of population tobacco control interventions on social inequalities in smoking.
Medical, nursing, psychological, social science and grey literature databases, bibliographies, hand-searches and contact with authors.
Studies were included (n = 84) if they reported the effects of any population-level tobacco control intervention on smoking behaviour or attitudes in individuals or groups with different demographic or socioeconomic characteristics.
Data extraction and quality assessment for each study were conducted by one reviewer and checked by a second.
Data were synthesised using graphical ("harvest plot") and narrative methods. No strong evidence of differential effects was found for smoking restrictions in workplaces and public places, although those in higher occupational groups may be more likely to change their attitudes or behaviour. Smoking restrictions in schools may be more effective in girls. Restrictions on sales to minors may be more effective in girls and younger children. Increasing the price of tobacco products may be more effective in reducing smoking among lower-income adults and those in manual occupations, although there was also some evidence to suggest that adults with higher levels of education may be more price-sensitive. Young people aged under 25 are also affected by price increases, with some evidence that boys and non-white young people may be more sensitive to price.
Population-level tobacco control interventions have the potential to benefit more disadvantaged groups and thereby contribute to reducing health inequalities.
评估人群烟草控制干预措施对吸烟方面社会不平等现象的影响。
医学、护理、心理学、社会科学及灰色文献数据库、参考文献目录、手工检索以及与作者联系。
若研究报告了任何人群层面的烟草控制干预措施对具有不同人口统计学或社会经济特征的个体或群体吸烟行为或态度的影响,则纳入该研究(n = 84)。
每项研究的数据提取和质量评估由一名审阅者进行,另一名审阅者进行核对。
采用图表法(“收获图”)和叙述法对数据进行综合分析。未发现有强有力的证据表明工作场所和公共场所的吸烟限制存在差异效应,不过较高职业群体的人可能更有可能改变他们的态度或行为。学校的吸烟限制对女孩可能更有效。对向未成年人销售烟草的限制对女孩和年幼儿童可能更有效。提高烟草产品价格在减少低收入成年人及体力劳动者吸烟方面可能更有效,尽管也有一些证据表明受教育程度较高的成年人可能对价格更敏感。25岁以下的年轻人也会受到价格上涨的影响,有证据表明男孩和非白人年轻人可能对价格更敏感。
人群层面的烟草控制干预措施有可能使更多弱势群体受益,从而有助于减少健康不平等现象。