» Articles » PMID: 18172148

The Impact of Tobacco Control Programs on Adult Smoking

Overview
Specialty Public Health
Date 2008 Jan 4
PMID 18172148
Citations 74
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objectives: We examined whether state tobacco control programs are effective in reducing the prevalence of adult smoking.

Methods: We used state survey data on smoking from 1985 to 2003 in a quasi-experimental design to examine the association between cumulative state antitobacco program expenditures and changes in adult smoking prevalence, after we controlled for confounding.

Results: From 1985 to 2003, national adult smoking prevalence declined from 29.5% to 18.6% (P<.001). Increases in state per capita tobacco control program expenditures were independently associated with declines in prevalence. Program expenditures were more effective in reducing smoking prevalence among adults aged 25 or older than for adults aged 18 to 24 years, whereas cigarette prices had a stronger effect on adults aged 18 to 24 years. If, starting in 1995, all states had funded their tobacco control programs at the minimum or optimal levels recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there would have been 2.2 million to 7.1 million fewer smokers by 2003.

Conclusions: State tobacco control program expenditures are independently associated with overall reductions in adult smoking prevalence.

Citing Articles

A systematic review and network meta-analysis of population-level interventions to tackle smoking behaviour.

Akter S, Rahman M, Rouyard T, Aktar S, Nsashiyi R, Nakamura R Nat Hum Behav. 2024; 8(12):2367-2391.

PMID: 39375543 PMC: 11659173. DOI: 10.1038/s41562-024-02002-7.


Impact of Smoking Reduction Scenarios on the Burden of Myocardial Infarction in the French Population Until 2035.

Kuhn J, Olie V, Grave C, Le Strat Y, Bonaldi C, Joly P Clin Epidemiol. 2024; 16:605-616.

PMID: 39262929 PMC: 11389704. DOI: 10.2147/CLEP.S440815.


Local Laws Regulating Cannabis in California Two Years Post Legalization: Assessing Incorporation of Lessons from Tobacco Control.

Padon A, Young-Wolff K, Avalos L, Silver L Cannabis. 2023; 5(3):47-60.

PMID: 37287931 PMC: 10212255. DOI: 10.26828/cannabis/2022.03.005.


The Economics of Tobacco Regulation: A Comprehensive Review.

DeCicca P, Kenkel D, Lovenheim M J Econ Lit. 2023; 60(3):883-970.

PMID: 37075070 PMC: 10072869. DOI: 10.1257/jel.20201482.


Smoking and the widening inequality in life expectancy between metropolitan and nonmetropolitan areas of the United States.

Hendi A, Ho J Front Public Health. 2022; 10:942842.

PMID: 36159248 PMC: 9490306. DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2022.942842.


References
1.
Jemal A, Cokkinides V, Shafey O, Thun M . Lung cancer trends in young adults: an early indicator of progress in tobacco control (United States). Cancer Causes Control. 2003; 14(6):579-85. DOI: 10.1023/a:1024891201329. View

2.
Farrelly M, Pechacek T, Chaloupka F . The impact of tobacco control program expenditures on aggregate cigarette sales: 1981-2000. J Health Econ. 2003; 22(5):843-59. DOI: 10.1016/S0167-6296(03)00057-2. View

3.
Schroeder S . Tobacco control in the wake of the 1998 master settlement agreement. N Engl J Med. 2004; 350(3):293-301. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsr031421. View

4.
Bauman K, Koch G . Validity of self-reports and descriptive and analytical conclusions: the case of cigarette smoking by adolescents and their mothers. Am J Epidemiol. 1983; 118(1):90-8. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113620. View

5.
Bal D, Kizer K, Felten P, MOZAR H, Niemeyer D . Reducing tobacco consumption in California. Development of a statewide anti-tobacco use campaign. JAMA. 1990; 264(12):1570-4. View