Department of Public Health, Amsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2021 Jan 22;23(2):239-248. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntz153.
Evidence on the association between tobacco outlet density and proximity and smoking behavior among youth is inconsistent, which may be due to methodological problems in some studies. We assessed the association of outlet density or proximity with smoking behavior among young people while taking into account the methodological quality of studies.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were systematically searched for studies on the relationship between outlet density or proximity and smoking behavior among 12- to 25-year-olds, published between 1997 and 2017. Methodological quality of the included studies was evaluated independently by two reviewers.
Twenty studies were included in the review. The quality assessment identified five primary sources of potential bias: overadjustment for mediators (problems identified in 14 studies), underadjustment for confounders (six studies), poor statistical model fit (four studies), selection bias (three studies), and misclassification of exposure measurements (eight studies). Four studies were of high methodological quality. In studies with relatively high quality, 10 associations were reported, of which seven were nonsignificant, two positive, and one negative. Similarly, the complete body of evidence demonstrated mostly nonsignificant associations, but a larger proportion of positive associations than negative.
Although there is some support for a positive direction, current literature does not provide consistent evidence for a positive association between outlet density and smoking among youth. This is not necessarily due to bias in specific studies, but more to fundamental challenges in study design and exposure measurements. These issues need to be addressed in future studies using more rigorous methods.
Our findings suggest that, although there is some evidence for a positive association, current scientific literature does not provide consistent support to claim an effect of tobacco outlet density or proximity on youth smoking. This underlines the need for more research with improved methodology. There is a need for quasiexperimental studies, in which the outlet density changes substantially, studies measuring the actual exposure of youth to tobacco outlets, and qualitative research on the mechanisms underlying any association.
有关烟草销售点密度和距离与青少年吸烟行为之间关联的证据不一致,这可能是由于一些研究中存在方法学问题。我们评估了在考虑研究方法学质量的情况下,销售点密度或距离与年轻人吸烟行为之间的关联。
系统地检索了 1997 年至 2017 年间发表的关于 12 至 25 岁人群中销售点密度或距离与吸烟行为之间关系的 MEDLINE、EMBASE 和 Google Scholar 研究,由两位评审员独立评估纳入研究的方法学质量。
综述纳入了 20 项研究。质量评估确定了五种潜在偏倚的主要来源:中介过度调整(14 项研究中存在的问题)、混杂因素调整不足(6 项研究)、统计模型拟合不良(4 项研究)、选择偏倚(3 项研究)和暴露测量分类错误(8 项研究)。四项研究质量较高。在质量相对较高的研究中,报告了 10 个关联,其中 7 个无统计学意义,2 个阳性,1 个阴性。同样,完整的证据体主要显示出无统计学意义的关联,但阳性关联的比例大于阴性关联。
尽管有一些支持正向方向的证据,但目前的文献并没有为青少年中销售点密度与吸烟之间存在正向关联提供一致的证据。这不一定是由于特定研究中的偏倚所致,而是更多地归因于研究设计和暴露测量方面的基本挑战。这些问题需要在未来的研究中使用更严格的方法来解决。
我们的研究结果表明,尽管有一些证据表明存在正向关联,但目前的科学文献并没有提供一致的证据来支持销售点密度或距离对青少年吸烟的影响。这突出了需要用改进的方法进行更多的研究。需要进行准实验研究,其中销售点密度有实质性变化,研究测量青少年实际接触烟草销售点的情况,以及对任何关联的潜在机制进行定性研究。