Program in Health Disparities Research, Family Medicine and Community Health, Medical School, University of Minnesota, 717 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55414, USA.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2012 Jun;14(6):631-8. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntr270. Epub 2012 Jan 23.
Disparities in tobacco's harm persist. Declines in smoking among the general population have not been experienced to the same extent by vulnerable populations. Innovative strategies are required to diminish disparities in tobacco's harm. As novel tools, anthropological concepts and methods may be applied to improve the design and outcomes of tobacco cessation interventions.
We reviewed over 60 articles published in peer-reviewed journals since 1995 for content on anthropology and smoking cessation. The specific questions framing the review were: (a) "How can lessons learned from anthropological studies of smoking improve the design and effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions?" (b) How can anthropology be applied to diminish disparities in smoking cessation? and (c) How can qualitative methods be used most effectively in smoking cessation intervention research?
Three specific disciplinary tools were identified and examined: (a) culture, (b) reflexivity, and (c) qualitative methods. Examining culture as a dynamic influence and understanding the utilities of smoking in a particular group is a precursor to promoting cessation. Reflexivity enables a deeper understanding of how smokers perceive quitting and smoking beyond addiction and individual health consequences. Qualitative methods may be used to elicit in-depth perspectives on quitting, insights to inform existing community-based strategies for making behavior changes, and detailed preferences for cessation treatment or programs.
Anthropological tools can be used to improve the effectiveness of intervention research studies targeting individuals from vulnerable groups. Synthesized applications of anthropological concepts can be used to facilitate translation of findings into clinical practice for providers addressing tobacco cessation in vulnerable populations.
烟草危害的差异仍然存在。一般人群的吸烟率下降并没有在弱势群体中得到同样程度的体现。需要创新策略来减少烟草危害的差异。作为新工具，人类学概念和方法可用于改进戒烟干预措施的设计和结果。
我们回顾了 1995 年以来发表在同行评议期刊上的 60 多篇文章，内容涉及人类学与戒烟。审查的具体问题是：(a)“从人类学对吸烟的研究中吸取的教训如何能改进戒烟干预措施的设计和效果？”(b)如何应用人类学来减少戒烟方面的差异？(c)如何最有效地将定性方法应用于戒烟干预研究？
确定并检查了三个具体的学科工具：(a)文化，(b)反思性，和(c)定性方法。将文化视为一种动态影响，并了解特定群体中吸烟的用途，是促进戒烟的前提。反思性使我们能够更深入地了解吸烟者如何看待戒烟以及吸烟超越成瘾和个人健康后果的问题。定性方法可用于深入了解戒烟的观点，为现有的以社区为基础的行为改变策略提供见解，并详细了解戒烟治疗或项目的偏好。
人类学工具可用于提高针对弱势群体个体的干预研究的效果。综合应用人类学概念可以促进将研究结果转化为临床实践，以便为解决弱势群体烟草问题的提供者提供服务。
