Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University, Washington, District of Columbia (Dr Levy and Ms Kou); Department of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan (Ms Tam); Department of Psychology and School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada (Dr Fong); Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Dr Fong); and Health Policy Center, Institute for Health Research and Policy, The University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois (Dr Chaloupka).
J Public Health Manag Pract. 2018 Sep/Oct;24(5):448-457. doi: 10.1097/PHH.0000000000000780.
The Tobacco Control Scorecard, published in 2004, presented estimates of the effectiveness of different policies on smoking rates. Since its publication, new evidence has emerged. We update the Scorecard to include recent studies of demand-reducing tobacco policies for high-income countries. We include cigarette taxes, smoke-free air laws, media campaigns, comprehensive tobacco control programs, marketing bans, health warnings, and cessation treatment policies. To update the 2004 Scorecard, a narrative review was conducted on reviews and studies published after 2000, with additional focus on 3 policies in which previous evidence was limited: tobacco control programs, graphic health warnings, and marketing bans. We consider evaluation studies that measured the effects of policies on smoking behaviors. Based on these findings, we derive estimates of short-term and long-term policy effect sizes. Cigarette taxes, smoke-free air laws, marketing restrictions, and comprehensive tobacco control programs are each found to play important roles in reducing smoking prevalence. Cessation treatment policies and graphic health warnings also reduce smoking and, when combined with policies that increase quit attempts, can improve quit success. The effect sizes are broadly consistent with those previously reported for the 2004 Scorecard but now reflect the larger evidence base evaluating the impact of health warnings and advertising restrictions.
《烟草控制记分卡》于 2004 年发布，对不同政策在吸烟率方面的有效性进行了评估。自发布以来，新的证据不断出现。我们对记分卡进行了更新，纳入了高收入国家减少烟草需求政策的最新研究。我们纳入了香烟税、无烟空气法、媒体宣传活动、综合烟草控制计划、营销禁令、健康警示和戒烟治疗政策。为了更新 2004 年的记分卡，我们对 2000 年后发布的综述和研究进行了叙述性回顾，并特别关注了之前证据有限的 3 项政策：烟草控制计划、图形健康警示和营销禁令。我们考虑了评估政策对吸烟行为影响的研究。根据这些发现，我们得出了短期和长期政策效果大小的估计。香烟税、无烟空气法、营销限制和综合烟草控制计划都被发现对降低吸烟率起着重要作用。戒烟治疗政策和图形健康警示也能减少吸烟，当与增加戒烟尝试的政策相结合时，能提高戒烟成功率。这些效果大小与 2004 年记分卡报告的结果基本一致，但现在反映了评估健康警示和广告限制影响的更大证据基础。
