There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

We sought to assess the impact of several tobacco control policies and televised antismoking advertising on adult smoking prevalence. We used a population survey in which smoking prevalence was measured each month from 1995 through 2006. Time-series analysis assessed the effect on smoking prevalence of televised antismoking advertising (with gross audience rating points [GRPs] per month), cigarette costliness, monthly sales of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and bupropion, and smoke-free restaurant laws. Increases in cigarette costliness and exposure to tobacco control media campaigns significantly reduced smoking prevalence. We found a 0.3-percentage-point reduction in smoking prevalence by either exposing the population to televised antismoking ads an average of almost 4 times per month (390 GRPs) or by increasing the costliness of a pack of cigarettes by 0.03% of gross average weekly earnings. Monthly sales of NRT and bupropion, exposure to NRT advertising, and smoke-free restaurant laws had no detectable impact on smoking prevalence. Increases in the real price of cigarettes and tobacco control mass media campaigns broadcast at sufficient exposure levels and at regular intervals are critical for reducing population smoking prevalence.

Related collections

Most cited references 30

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Cigarette demand: a meta-analysis of elasticities.

Craig Gallet, J List (2003)

Estimating elasticities of cigarette demand has become commonplace amongst economists and policymakers. Synthesizing the various elasticities into a coherent message is quite challenging, however, as the point estimates are obtained using quite disparate modeling techniques and data. In this study, we perform a meta-analysis to explore factors that influence variations within and across studies. Empirical results suggest that demand specification, data issues, and estimation methodology have varying degrees of influence on reported estimates of price, income, and advertising elasticities. Copyright 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

0 comments Cited 84 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation.

Tim Lancaster, A. G. Fowler, L Stead … (2003)

The aim of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is to replace nicotine from cigarettes. This reduces withdrawal symptoms associated with smoking cessation thus helping resist the urge to smoke cigarettes. The aims of this review were:to determine the effectiveness of the different forms of NRT (chewing gum, transdermal patches, nasal spray, inhalers and tablets) in achieving abstinence from cigarettes, or a sustained reduction in amount smoked; to determine whether the effect is influenced by the clinical setting in which the smoker is recruited and treated, the dosage and form of the NRT used, or the intensity of additional advice and support offered to the smoker; to determine whether combinations of NRT are more effective than one type alone; to determine its effectiveness compared to other pharmacotherapies. We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group trials register in March 2004. Randomized trials in which NRT was compared to placebo or to no treatment, or where different doses of NRT were compared. We excluded trials which did not report cessation rates, and those with follow up of less than six months. We extracted data in duplicate on the type of participants, the dose, duration and form of nicotine therapy, the outcome measures, method of randomization, and completeness of follow up. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months of follow up. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence for each trial, and biochemically validated rates if available. For each study we calculated summary odds ratios. Where appropriate, we performed meta-analysis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect model. We identified 123 trials; 103 contributing to the primary comparison between NRT and a placebo or non-NRT control group. The odds ratio (OR) for abstinence with NRT compared to control was 1.77 (95% confidence intervals (CI): 1.66 to 1.88). The ORs for the different forms of NRT were 1.66 (95% CI: 1.52 to 1.81) for gum, 1.81 (95% CI: 1.63 to 2.02) for patches, 2.35 (95% CI: 1.63 to 3.38) for nasal spray, 2.14 (95% CI: 1.44 to 3.18) for inhaled nicotine and 2.05 (95% CI: 1.62 to 2.59) for nicotine sublingual tablet/lozenge. These odds were largely independent of the duration of therapy, the intensity of additional support provided or the setting in which the NRT was offered. In highly dependent smokers there was a significant benefit of 4 mg gum compared with 2 mg gum (OR 2.20, 95% CI: 1.85 to 3.25). There was weak evidence that combinations of forms of NRT are more effective. Higher doses of nicotine patch may produce small increases in quit rates. Only one study directly compared NRT to another pharmacotherapy. In this study quit rates with bupropion were higher than with nicotine patch or placebo. All of the commercially available forms of NRT (gum, transdermal patch, nasal spray, inhaler and sublingual tablets/lozenges) are effective as part of a strategy to promote smoking cessation. They increase the odds of quitting approximately 1.5 to 2 fold regardless of setting. The effectiveness of NRT appears to be largely independent of the intensity of additional support provided to the smoker. Provision of more intense levels of support, although beneficial in facilitating the likelihood of quitting, is not essential to the success of NRT.

0 comments Cited 54 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Can we measure encoded exposure? Validation evidence from a national campaign.

Brian Southwell, Carlin Henry Barmada, Robert C Hornik … (2015)

Exposure is often cited as an explanation for campaign success or failure. A lack of validation evidence for typical exposure measures, however, suggests the possibility of either misdirected measurement or incomplete conceptualization of the idea. If whether people engage campaign content in a basic, rudimentary manner is what matters when we talk about exposure, a recognition-based task should provide a useful measure of exposure, or what we might call encoded exposure, that we can validate. Data from two independent sources, the National Survey of Parents and Youth (NSPY) and purchase data from a national antidrug campaign, offer such validation. Both youth and their parents were much more likely to recognize actual campaign advertisements than to claim recognition of bogus advertisements. Also, gross rating points (GRPs) for a campaign advertisement correlated strikingly with average encoded exposure for an advertisement among both youth (r = 0.82) and their parents (r = 0.53).

0 comments Cited 43 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

PubMed ID:: 18556601

PMC ID:: 2446442

DOI:: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.128991

ScienceOpen disciplines: Chemistry

Keywords: Adolescent,Adult,Australia,epidemiology,Bupropion,therapeutic use,Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors,Female,Health Policy,Health Surveys,Humans,Male,Mass Media,Nicotinic Agonists,Prevalence,Restaurants,Smoking,economics,legislation & jurisprudence,prevention & control,Smoking Cessation,methods,Social Marketing,Television,Tobacco Industry

Impact of tobacco control policies and mass media campaigns on monthly adult smoking prevalence.

Read this article at

Abstract

Related collections

Methods by AKJournals

Most cited references 30

Cigarette demand: a meta-analysis of elasticities.

Nicotine replacement therapy for smoking cessation.

Can we measure encoded exposure? Validation evidence from a national campaign.

Author and article information

Journal

Comments

Comment on this article

Similar content 117

Cited by 94

Most referenced authors 296