• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

公共场所禁烟与吸烟率和戒烟率的社会经济不平等:瑞士日内瓦基于人群的横断面研究(1995-2014 年)。

Public smoking ban and socioeconomic inequalities in smoking prevalence and cessation: a cross-sectional population-based study in Geneva, Switzerland (1995-2014).

机构信息

Unit of Population Epidemiology, Department of Community Medicine, Primary Care and Emergency Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.

Department of General Internal Medicine, Rehabilitation and Geriatrics, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland.

出版信息

Tob Control. 2018 Nov;27(6):663-669. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053986. Epub 2018 Jan 26.

DOI:10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053986
PMID:29374093
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Smoking bans were suggested to reduce smoking prevalence and increase quit ratio but their equity impact remains unclear. We aimed to characterise the socioeconomic status (SES)-related inequalities in smoking prevalence and quit ratio before and after the implementation of a public smoking ban.

METHODS

We included data from 17 544 participants in the population-based cross-sectional Bus Santé study in Geneva, Switzerland, between 1995 and 2014. We considered educational attainment (primary, secondary and tertiary) as a SES indicator. Outcomes were smoking prevalence (proportion of current smokers) and quit ratio (ex-smokers to ever-smokers ratio). We used segmented linear regression to assess the overall impact of smoking ban on outcome trends. We calculated the relative (RII) and slope (SII, absolute difference) indexes of inequality, quantifying disparities between educational groups in outcomes overall (1995-2014), before and after ban implementation (November 2009).

RESULTS

Least educated participants displayed higher smoking prevalence (RII=2.04, P<0.001; SII=0.15, P<0.001) and lower quit ratio (RII=0.73, P<0.001; SII=-0.18, P<0.001). As in other studies, smoking ban implementation coincided with a temporary reduction of smoking prevalence (P=0.003) and increase in quit ratio (P=0.02), with a progressive return to preban levels. Inequalities increased (P<0.05) in relative terms for smoking prevalence (RII=1.84, P<0.001 and RII=3.01, P<0.001) and absolute terms for both outcomes (smoking prevalence: SII=0.14, P<0.001 and SII=0.19, P<0.001; quit ratio: SII=-0.15, P<0.001 and SII=-0.27, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of a public smoking ban coincided with a short-lived decrease in smoking prevalence and increase in quit ratio but also with a widening in SES inequalities in smoking-related outcomes.

摘要

引言

禁烟措施被建议用于降低吸烟率和提高戒烟率,但它们的公平性影响仍不清楚。我们旨在描述实施公共场所禁烟令前后,与社会经济地位(SES)相关的吸烟率和戒烟率的不平等情况。

方法

我们纳入了瑞士日内瓦基于人群的横断面 Bus Santé 研究中 17544 名参与者的数据,该研究在 1995 年至 2014 年期间进行。我们将教育程度(小学、中学和高等教育)作为 SES 指标。结果是吸烟率(当前吸烟者的比例)和戒烟率(戒烟者与曾经吸烟者的比例)。我们使用分段线性回归来评估禁烟令对结果趋势的总体影响。我们计算了不平等的相对(RII)和斜率(SII,绝对差异)指数,量化了教育程度不同的人群在整个(1995-2014 年)和禁令实施前后(2009 年 11 月)的结果之间的差异。

结果

受教育程度最低的参与者吸烟率更高(RII=2.04,P<0.001;SII=0.15,P<0.001),戒烟率更低(RII=0.73,P<0.001;SII=-0.18,P<0.001)。与其他研究一样,禁烟令的实施与吸烟率的暂时降低(P=0.003)和戒烟率的增加(P=0.02)同时发生,随后逐渐恢复到禁令实施前的水平。相对而言,吸烟率的不平等程度增加(P<0.05)(RII=1.84,P<0.001 和 RII=3.01,P<0.001),绝对不平等程度也增加(P<0.001)(吸烟率:SII=0.14,P<0.001 和 SII=0.19,P<0.001;戒烟率:SII=-0.15,P<0.001 和 SII=-0.27,P<0.001)。

结论

实施公共场所禁烟令与吸烟率的短暂下降和戒烟率的短暂上升同时发生,但也导致了与吸烟相关的结果在 SES 方面的不平等程度扩大。

相似文献

1
Public smoking ban and socioeconomic inequalities in smoking prevalence and cessation: a cross-sectional population-based study in Geneva, Switzerland (1995-2014).公共场所禁烟与吸烟率和戒烟率的社会经济不平等:瑞士日内瓦基于人群的横断面研究(1995-2014 年)。
Tob Control. 2018 Nov;27(6):663-669. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2017-053986. Epub 2018 Jan 26.
2
Socioeconomic Inequalities in Smoking and Smoking Cessation Due to a Smoking Ban: General Population-Based Cross-Sectional Study in Luxembourg.吸烟及因禁烟导致的戒烟方面的社会经济不平等:卢森堡基于普通人群的横断面研究
PLoS One. 2016 Apr 21;11(4):e0153966. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0153966. eCollection 2016.
3
Alcohol control policies and socioeconomic inequalities in hazardous alcohol consumption: a 22-year cross-sectional study in a Swiss urban population.酒精控制政策与危险饮酒的社会经济不平等:瑞士城市人口 22 年的横断面研究。
BMJ Open. 2019 May 24;9(5):e028971. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-028971.
4
Trends in socioeconomic inequalities in smoking prevalence, consumption, initiation, and cessation between 2001 and 2008 in the Netherlands. Findings from a national population survey.2001 年至 2008 年期间荷兰吸烟流行率、消费、起始和戒烟方面的社会经济不平等趋势。全国人口调查结果。
BMC Public Health. 2012 May 18;12:303. doi: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-303.
5
Impact of the 2005 smoke-free policy in Italy on prevalence, cessation and intensity of smoking in the overall population and by educational group.意大利 2005 年无烟政策对总体人群及不同教育程度人群的吸烟流行率、戒烟率和吸烟强度的影响。
Addiction. 2012 Sep;107(9):1677-86. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03853.x. Epub 2012 May 8.
6
Introduction of an organised programme and social inequalities in mammography screening: A 22-year population-based study in Geneva, Switzerland.组织化项目与乳腺 X 光筛查中的社会不平等:瑞士日内瓦基于人群的 22 年研究。
Prev Med. 2017 Oct;103:49-55. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.07.025. Epub 2017 Aug 1.
7
The population impact of smoke-free workplace and hospitality industry legislation on smoking behaviour. Findings from a national population survey.无烟工作场所和酒店业立法对吸烟行为的人口影响。全国人口调查的结果。
Addiction. 2011 Apr;106(4):816-23. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.03247.x. Epub 2010 Dec 23.
8
Impact of tobacco prices and smoke-free policy on smoking cessation, by gender and educational group: Spain, 1993-2012.烟草价格和无烟政策对不同性别和教育程度人群戒烟的影响:西班牙,1993-2012 年。
Int J Drug Policy. 2015 Dec;26(12):1215-21. doi: 10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.05.011. Epub 2015 Jun 5.
9
Socioeconomic inequalities in smoking in The Netherlands before and during the Global Financial Crisis: a repeated cross-sectional study.全球金融危机之前及期间荷兰吸烟方面的社会经济不平等:一项重复横断面研究
BMC Public Health. 2015 May 6;15:469. doi: 10.1186/s12889-015-1782-6.
10
Socioeconomic inequalities in smoking cessation in 11 European countries from 1987 to 2012.1987 年至 2012 年 11 个欧洲国家的戒烟与社会经济不平等状况。
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2015 Sep;69(9):886-92. doi: 10.1136/jech-2014-205171. Epub 2015 Apr 3.

引用本文的文献

1
Impact of tobacco control policies on socioeconomic inequalities in smoking prevalence and quit ratios: an ecological study in the European Union (2009-2020).烟草控制政策对吸烟流行率和戒烟率社会经济不平等的影响:欧盟的一项生态研究(2009 - 2020年)
BMJ Public Health. 2025 Aug 6;3(2):e002418. doi: 10.1136/bmjph-2024-002418. eCollection 2025.
2
Best practices for secondhand smoke and secondhand aerosol protection and evidence supporting the expansion of smoke- and aerosol-free environments: Recommendations from the 2nd Joint Action on Tobacco Control.二手烟和二手气溶胶防护的最佳实践以及支持扩大无烟和无气溶胶环境的证据:第二届烟草控制联合行动的建议
Tob Prev Cessat. 2024 Oct 21;10. doi: 10.18332/tpc/193147. eCollection 2024.
3
Twelve-year (2008-2019) trends in socioeconomic inequalities in cardiovascular risk factors in a Swiss representative survey of the general population.在一项瑞士普通人群代表性调查中,心血管危险因素社会经济不平等状况的12年(2008 - 2019年)趋势。
Prev Med Rep. 2024 Jul 14;45:102823. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2024.102823. eCollection 2024 Sep.
4
Influence of Sociodemographic Variables and Healthy Habits on the Values of Insulin Resistance Indicators in 386,924 Spanish Workers.社会人口学变量和健康习惯对 386924 名西班牙工人胰岛素抵抗指标值的影响。
Nutrients. 2023 Dec 16;15(24):5122. doi: 10.3390/nu15245122.
5
Trends in the distribution of socioeconomic inequalities in smoking and cessation: evidence among adults aged 18 ~ 59 from China Family Panel Studies data.吸烟和戒烟社会经济不平等分布趋势:来自中国家庭追踪调查数据的 18 至 59 岁成年人证据。
Int J Equity Health. 2023 May 11;22(1):86. doi: 10.1186/s12939-023-01898-3.
6
Trends and Regional Variation in Prevalence of Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Association With Socioeconomic Status in Canada, 2005-2016.2005 - 2016年加拿大心血管危险因素患病率的趋势和地区差异及其与社会经济地位的关联
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Aug 2;4(8):e2121443. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.21443.
7
Protocol for the evaluation of cost-effectiveness and health equity impact of a school-based tobacco prevention programme in a cluster randomised controlled trial (the TOPAS study).基于群组随机对照试验(TOPAS 研究)评估基于学校的烟草预防计划的成本效益和健康公平影响的方案。
BMJ Open. 2021 Aug 12;11(8):e045476. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-045476.
8
Health Insurance Deductibles and Health Care-Seeking Behaviors in a Consumer-Driven Health Care System With Universal Coverage.在全民覆盖的消费驱动型医疗保健系统中,健康保险扣除额与医疗保健寻求行为。
JAMA Netw Open. 2021 Jul 1;4(7):e2115722. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.15722.
9
Current Tobacco Smoking Prevalence Among Iranian Population: A Closer Look at the STEPS Surveys.伊朗人群中当前的吸烟流行率:对 STEPS 调查的更深入观察。
Front Public Health. 2020 Dec 16;8:571062. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2020.571062. eCollection 2020.
10
Impact of population tobacco control interventions on socioeconomic inequalities in smoking: a systematic review and appraisal of future research directions.人群烟草控制干预措施对吸烟方面社会经济不平等的影响:一项系统综述及对未来研究方向的评估
Tob Control. 2020 Sep 29;30(e2):e87-95. doi: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2020-055874.