Kong Amanda Y, Qingzi Tao Vivian, Golden Shelley D
Department of Family and Preventive Medicine, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 800 Stanton L Young Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73117, USA.
TSET Health Promotion Research Center, Stephenson Cancer Center, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 655 Research Pkwy #400, Oklahoma City, OK 73104, USA.
Prev Med Rep. 2023 Sep 27;36:102446. doi: 10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102446. eCollection 2023 Dec.
Tobacco use causes numerous types of cancers, heart diseases, and chronic illnesses, and is responsible for nearly 1 in every 5 deaths in the United States (U.S.) annually. This study assessed whether tobacco control laws introduced in state legislatures between 2010 and 2015 provided a rationale for the proposed bill and/or specified priority population groups, and we then examined emerging themes in the text that did so.
Using LexisNexis® State Net®, we identified tobacco control bills introduced in all states and coded their bill rationales and population category. We then conducted qualitative thematic analysis on a sample of bills with rationales or specified populations.
Of the 2815 tobacco control bills introduced in state legislatures in the analysis period, 422 (15.0%) included a bill rationale, and 1309 (46.5%) specified at least one priority population. Four overarching themes emerged: 1) Addressing tobacco-related health harms and financial costs incurred to society; 2) Protecting the public from tobacco-related harms as a government responsibility; 3) Providing services to priority populations; 4) Exempting or preempting some population groups and localities.
Rationalizing tobacco control legislation by focusing on both health and cost implications was a key feature of tobacco policy bill text we analyzed; given the history of this approach, it is likely to remain so in the future. Our study may serve as a benchmark for tracking current and future tobacco control legislation to examine whether there is a growth in prioritizing populations experiencing unjust burdens of tobacco use and related disease.
烟草使用会引发多种癌症、心脏病和慢性疾病，在美国，每年近五分之一的死亡都与此有关。本研究评估了2010年至2015年间州立法机构出台的烟草控制法律是否为拟议法案提供了依据和/或明确了优先人群，然后我们研究了文本中出现的相关新主题。
我们使用LexisNexis® State Net®，识别所有州出台的烟草控制法案，并对其法案依据和人群类别进行编码。然后，我们对有依据或明确人群的法案样本进行定性主题分析。
在分析期内州立法机构出台的2815项烟草控制法案中，422项（15.0%）包含法案依据，1309项（46.5%）明确了至少一个优先人群。出现了四个总体主题：1）应对与烟草相关的健康危害以及给社会带来的经济成本；2）作为政府责任保护公众免受烟草相关危害；3）为优先人群提供服务；4）豁免或优先于某些人群和地区。
通过关注健康和成本影响来使烟草控制立法合理化，是我们分析的烟草政策法案文本的一个关键特征；鉴于这种方法的历史，未来可能仍将如此。我们的研究可作为跟踪当前和未来烟草控制立法的基准，以检查在优先考虑承受烟草使用及相关疾病不公平负担的人群方面是否有所增加。
