M M Schaap1, A E Kunst. 1. Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA Rotterdam, the Netherlands. m.m.schaap@erasmusmc.nl
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To support policies to tackle socio-economic inequalities in smoking, monitoring systems should include information on smoking according to socio-economic position (SEP). This paper aims to review the methods applied in recent scientific studies on inequalities in smoking, with the aim of drawing lessons for the monitoring of smoking inequalities. STUDY DESIGN: Literature review. METHODS: Seventy studies on socio-economic inequalities in smoking, published since 1990, were selected and reviewed, with particular focus on study design, indicators of SEP and smoking outcomes. RESULTS: Most studies had a cross-sectional design and measured smoking prevalence rates among adults in relation to educational level. In addition to educational level, measures of household wealth and occupational class had strong associations with smoking outcomes. In addition to smoking prevalence, other outcome measures such as initiation rates, cessation rates and consumption level are needed to provide in-depth knowledge of the effect of SEP on smoking, especially from a life-course perspective. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that, as well as educational level, other socio-economic indicators should be used to identify socio-economic groups where smoking rates are highest. Estimates of inequalities in initiation and cessation rates are needed to identify the most important age groups and entry points for policies to tackle inequalities in smoking.
OBJECTIVES: To support policies to tackle socio-economic inequalities in smoking, monitoring systems should include information on smoking according to socio-economic position (SEP). This paper aims to review the methods applied in recent scientific studies on inequalities in smoking, with the aim of drawing lessons for the monitoring of smoking inequalities. STUDY DESIGN: Literature review. METHODS: Seventy studies on socio-economic inequalities in smoking, published since 1990, were selected and reviewed, with particular focus on study design, indicators of SEP and smoking outcomes. RESULTS: Most studies had a cross-sectional design and measured smoking prevalence rates among adults in relation to educational level. In addition to educational level, measures of household wealth and occupational class had strong associations with smoking outcomes. In addition to smoking prevalence, other outcome measures such as initiation rates, cessation rates and consumption level are needed to provide in-depth knowledge of the effect of SEP on smoking, especially from a life-course perspective. CONCLUSIONS: It is recommended that, as well as educational level, other socio-economic indicators should be used to identify socio-economic groups where smoking rates are highest. Estimates of inequalities in initiation and cessation rates are needed to identify the most important age groups and entry points for policies to tackle inequalities in smoking.
Authors: Darla E Kendzor; Lorraine R Reitzel; Carlos A Mazas; Ludmila M Cofta-Woerpel; Yumei Cao; Lingyun Ji; Tracy J Costello; Jennifer Irvin Vidrine; Michael S Businelle; Yisheng Li; Yessenia Castro; Jasjit S Ahluwalia; Paul M Cinciripini; David W Wetter Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2012-02-23 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Margarete C Kulik; Terje A Eikemo; Enrique Regidor; Gwenn Menvielle; Johan P Mackenbach Journal: Int J Public Health Date: 2014-05-20 Impact factor: 3.380
Authors: Gera E Nagelhout; Karin Hummel; Marc C Willemsen; Mohammad Siahpush; Anton E Kunst; Hein de Vries; Geoffrey T Fong; Bas van den Putte Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2014-04-28 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Eric J Holowaty; Todd A Norwood; Susitha Wanigaratne; Juanjo J Abellan; Linda Beale Journal: Int J Health Geogr Date: 2010-05-10 Impact factor: 3.918
Authors: Debora L Oh; Julia E Heck; Carolyn Dresler; Shane Allwright; Margaretha Haglund; Sara S Del Mazo; Eva Kralikova; Isabelle Stucker; Elizabeth Tamang; Ellen R Gritz; Mia Hashibe Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2010-02-17 Impact factor: 3.295