George Thomson1, Nick Wilson1, Damian Collins2, Richard Edwards1. 1. Department of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand. 2. Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review the published survey data on public support for smoke-free outdoor regulations in the USA and Canada (two countries at the forefront of such policies). DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: We searched for English language articles and reports using Medline, Google Scholar and Google for the period to December 2014. We retained population-based surveys of the adult general population in jurisdictions in the USA and Canada, with a minimum survey sample of 500. DATA EXTRACTION: The analysis focused on assessing levels and trends in public support for different types of places and also explored how support varied between population groups. RESULTS: Relevant data were found from 89 cross-sectional surveys between 1993 and 2014. Support for smoke-free regulations in outdoor places tended to be highest for smoke-free school grounds (range: 57-95%) playgrounds (89-91%), and building entrances (45-89%) and lowest for smoke-free outdoor workplaces (12-46%) and sidewalks (31-49%). Support was lower among smokers, though for some types of places there was majority smoker support (eg, school grounds with at least 77% support in US state surveys after 2004). Trend data involving the same questions and the same surveyed populations suggested increased general public and smoker support for smoke-free regulations over time (eg, from 67% to 78% during 2002-2008 for smoke-free school grounds in the USA). Higher support was typically seen from women and some ethnic groups (eg, African-Americans). CONCLUSIONS: Outdoor smoke-free regulations can achieve majority public support, including from smokers. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
OBJECTIVE: To review the published survey data on public support for smoke-free outdoor regulations in the USA and Canada (two countries at the forefront of such policies). DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: We searched for English language articles and reports using Medline, Google Scholar and Google for the period to December 2014. We retained population-based surveys of the adult general population in jurisdictions in the USA and Canada, with a minimum survey sample of 500. DATA EXTRACTION: The analysis focused on assessing levels and trends in public support for different types of places and also explored how support varied between population groups. RESULTS: Relevant data were found from 89 cross-sectional surveys between 1993 and 2014. Support for smoke-free regulations in outdoor places tended to be highest for smoke-free school grounds (range: 57-95%) playgrounds (89-91%), and building entrances (45-89%) and lowest for smoke-free outdoor workplaces (12-46%) and sidewalks (31-49%). Support was lower among smokers, though for some types of places there was majority smoker support (eg, school grounds with at least 77% support in US state surveys after 2004). Trend data involving the same questions and the same surveyed populations suggested increased general public and smoker support for smoke-free regulations over time (eg, from 67% to 78% during 2002-2008 for smoke-free school grounds in the USA). Higher support was typically seen from women and some ethnic groups (eg, African-Americans). CONCLUSIONS: Outdoor smoke-free regulations can achieve majority public support, including from smokers. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/
Entities:
Keywords:
Prevention; Public opinion; Public policy; Secondhand smoke; Socioeconomic status
Authors: Nienke W Boderie; Famke Jm Mölenberg; Aziz Sheikh; Wichor M Bramer; Alex Burdorf; Frank J van Lenthe; Jasper V Been Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-02-05 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Anne C Grunseit; Eloise Howse; Erika Bohn-Goldbaum; Jo Mitchell; Adrian E Bauman Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Ann Pederson; Chizimuzo T Okoli; Natalie Hemsing; Renée O'Leary; Amanda Wiggins; Wendy Rice; Joan L Bottorff; Lorraine Greaves Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-08-22 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Otto Ruokolainen; Hanna Ollila; Kristiina Patja; Katja Borodulin; Tiina Laatikainen; Tellervo Korhonen Journal: Nordisk Alkohol Nark Date: 2018-04-19