Impact and effectiveness of legislative smoking bans and anti-tobacco media campaigns in reducing smoking among women in the us: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Yelena Bird, Ladan Kashaniamin, Chijioke Nwankwo, John Moraros*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature addressing the effectiveness of legislative smoking bans and anti-tobacco media campaigns in reducing smoking among women. Methods: MEDLINE, PubMed, CINAHL, and ABI/INFORM were searched for studies published from 2005 onwards. Meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model and subgroup analysis on pre-selected characteristics. Results: In total, 652 articles were identified, and five studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. The studies varied from school-based to workplace settings and had a total of 800,573 women participants, aged 12 to 64 years old. Three studies used legislative bans, one study used anti-tobacco campaigns and another one used both as their intervention. The overall pooled effect of the five studies yielded an odds ratio (OR) = 1.137 (C.I. = 0.976–1.298 and I2 = 85.6%). Subgroup analysis by intervention revealed a significant pooled estimate for studies using legislative smoking bans OR = 1.280 (C.I. = 1.172–1.389 and I2 = 0%). Conclusion: Legislative smoking bans were found to be associated with a reduction in the smoking rates among women compared to anti-tobacco media campaigns. Further research in this area is needed.

Original languageEnglish
Article number20
JournalHEALTHCARE
Volume8
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2020
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Anti-tobacco media campaigns
  • Legislative smoking bans
  • Smoking
  • Women

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Impact and effectiveness of legislative smoking bans and anti-tobacco media campaigns in reducing smoking among women in the us: A systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this