» Articles » PMID: 29574440

Projecting the Effects of Tobacco Control Policies in the USA Through Microsimulation: a Study Protocol

Overview
Journal BMJ Open
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2018 Mar 26
PMID 29574440
Citations 27
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Smoking remains the leading cause of preventable death in the USA but can be reduced through policy interventions. Computational models of smoking can provide estimates of the projected impact of tobacco control policies and can be used to inform public health decision making. We outline a protocol for simulating the effects of tobacco policies on population health outcomes.

Methods And Analysis: We extend the Smoking History Generator (SHG), a microsimulation model based on data from the National Health Interview Surveys, to evaluate the effects of tobacco control policies on projections of smoking prevalence and mortality in the USA. The SHG simulates individual life trajectories including smoking initiation, cessation and mortality. We illustrate the application of the SHG policy module for four types of tobacco control policies at the national and state levels: smoke-free air laws, cigarette taxes, increasing tobacco control programme expenditures and raising the minimum age of legal access to tobacco. Smoking initiation and cessation rates are modified by age, birth cohort, gender and years since policy implementation. Initiation and cessation rate modifiers are adjusted for differences across age groups and the level of existing policy coverage. Smoking prevalence, the number of population deaths avoided, and life-years gained are calculated for each policy scenario at the national and state levels. The model only considers direct individual benefits through reduced smoking and does not consider benefits through reduced exposure to secondhand smoke.

Ethics And Dissemination: A web-based interface is being developed to integrate the results of the simulations into a format that allows the user to explore the projected effects of tobacco control policies in the USA. Usability testing is being conducted in which experts provide feedback on the interface. Development of this tool is under way, and a publicly accessible website is available at http://www.tobaccopolicyeffects.org.

Citing Articles

Modeling the population health impact of accurate and inaccurate perceptions of harm from nicotine.

Hannel T, Wei L, Muhammad-Kah R, Largo E, Sarkar M Harm Reduct J. 2024; 21(1):145.

PMID: 39123205 PMC: 11312148. DOI: 10.1186/s12954-024-01059-x.


A compartmental model for smoking dynamics in Italy: a pipeline for inference, validation, and forecasting under hypothetical scenarios.

Lachi A, Viscardi C, Cereda G, Carreras G, Baccini M BMC Med Res Methodol. 2024; 24(1):148.

PMID: 39003462 PMC: 11245805. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-024-02271-w.


The potential impact of removing a ban on electronic nicotine delivery systems using the Mexico smoking and vaping model (SAVM).

Sanchez-Romero L, Li Y, Zavala-Arciniega L, Gallegos-Carrillo K, Thrasher J, Meza R medRxiv. 2024; .

PMID: 38746147 PMC: 11092684. DOI: 10.1101/2024.04.28.24306511.


The smoking and vaping model, A user-friendly model for examining the country-specific impact of nicotine VAPING product use: application to Germany.

Sanchez-Romero L, Liber A, Li Y, Yuan Z, Tam J, Travis N BMC Public Health. 2023; 23(1):2299.

PMID: 37990171 PMC: 10662637. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-023-17152-y.


Contribution of smoking, disease history, and survival to lung cancer disparities in Black individuals.

Skolnick S, Cao P, Jeon J, Meza R J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2023; 2023(62):204-211.

PMID: 37947334 PMC: 10637023. DOI: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgad016.


References
1.
Durrleman S, Simon R . Flexible regression models with cubic splines. Stat Med. 1989; 8(5):551-61. DOI: 10.1002/sim.4780080504. View

2.
Contreary K, Chattopadhyay S, Hopkins D, Chaloupka F, Forster J, Grimshaw V . Economic Impact of Tobacco Price Increases Through Taxation: A Community Guide Systematic Review. Am J Prev Med. 2015; 49(5):800-808. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.04.026. View

3.
Feirman S, Glasser A, Rose S, Niaura R, Abrams D, Teplitskaya L . Computational Models Used to Assess US Tobacco Control Policies. Nicotine Tob Res. 2017; 19(11):1257-1267. DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntx017. View

4.
Levy D, Mabry P, Graham A, Orleans C, Abrams D . Reaching Healthy People 2010 by 2013: A SimSmoke simulation. Am J Prev Med. 2010; 38(3 Suppl):S373-81. PMC: 2843137. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2009.11.018. View

5.
Schneider S, Buka S, Dash K, Winickoff J, ODonnell L . Community reductions in youth smoking after raising the minimum tobacco sales age to 21. Tob Control. 2015; 25(3):355-9. DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2014-052207. View