Department of Epidemiology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2022 Oct 26;24(11):1732-1740. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntac122.
Using a quasiexperimental design, we compared the impact of the 2000 Canadian introduction of graphic warning labels (GWLs) on differences in smoking prevalence by sex and education, to the United States, where no GWLs were introduced.
We pooled 1999-2004 data from the Canadian Tobacco Use Monitoring Survey and the U.S. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System. We used a difference-in-difference (DD) model to assess the impact of Canadian policy introduction on smoking prevalence, and a difference-in-difference-in-difference (DDD) model to examine differences in the policy impact by sex and education, comparing Canada (the treatment group) with the United States (the control group).
From 1999 to 2004, smoking prevalence decreased from 23.7% to 18.6% in Canada, and from 21.7% to 20.0% in the United States. Results from the DD regression models showed that Canadian respondents reported lower odds of being a current smoker compared to the U.S. respondents following the 2000 introduction of GWLs (OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.74-0.94). The DDD model showed that the impact of the Canadian GWLs versus the United States did not differ by sex or education.
The 2000 Canadian GWL policy reduced smoking prevalence overall, with similar reductions for males and females and across education levels. The impact of the Canadian GWLs in reducing smoking prevalence did not reduce differences by sex or education. Although beneficial for all smokers, GWLs may not serve to decrease existing disparities, especially those by socioeconomic status.
Existing evidence shows that GWL implementation is associated with reductions in smoking prevalence. But there is limited evidence from past evaluation studies on whether the impact of GWLs on smoking prevalence differs by sociodemographic subgroup. Our findings confirm existing studies that the 2000 implementation of GWLs in Canada was significantly associated with an overall reduction in smoking prevalence in Canada compared to the United States. However, our study improves existing evidence by showing that the impact of the Canadian GWLs on smoking prevalence did not differ by sex or education, and thus did not reduce existing smoking disparities by educational levels.
采用准实验设计,我们比较了 2000 年加拿大引入图形警示标签(GWL)对男女和教育程度不同的吸烟率的影响,与美国形成对比,美国没有引入 GWL。
我们汇总了 1999 年至 2004 年来自加拿大烟草使用监测调查和美国行为风险因素监测系统的数据。我们使用差异中的差异(DD)模型来评估加拿大政策引入对吸烟率的影响,并用差异中的差异中的差异(DDD)模型来检验性别和教育程度的政策影响差异,将加拿大(治疗组)与美国(对照组)进行比较。
1999 年至 2004 年,加拿大的吸烟率从 23.7%降至 18.6%,美国从 21.7%降至 20.0%。DD 回归模型的结果表明,与 2000 年 GWL 引入后相比,加拿大受访者报告说自己是当前吸烟者的几率较低(OR=0.84,95%CI=0.74-0.94)。DDD 模型表明,加拿大 GWL 与美国相比,其影响在性别或教育程度上没有差异。
2000 年加拿大 GWL 政策总体上降低了吸烟率,男性和女性以及各教育程度的降幅相似。加拿大 GWL 减少吸烟率的影响并没有减少性别或教育程度的差异。虽然对所有吸烟者都有益,但 GWL 可能无法减少现有的差异,尤其是那些与社会经济地位有关的差异。
现有证据表明,GWL 的实施与吸烟率的降低有关。但是,过去的评估研究中关于 GWL 对吸烟率的影响是否因社会人口统计学亚组而异的证据有限。我们的研究结果证实了现有研究,即与美国相比,2000 年加拿大实施 GWL 与加拿大总体吸烟率的降低显著相关。然而,我们的研究通过表明加拿大 GWL 对吸烟率的影响在性别或教育程度上没有差异,从而没有减少各教育程度现有的吸烟差距,从而改进了现有证据。