Lindsay Robertson1, Claire Cameron2, Rob McGee2, Louise Marsh1, Janet Hoek3. 1. Cancer Society of New Zealand Social and Behavioural Research Unit, Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand. 2. Department of Preventive and Social Medicine, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand. 3. Department of Marketing, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Previous systematic reviews have found consistent evidence of a positive association between exposure to point-of-sale (POS) tobacco promotion and increased smoking and smoking susceptibility among children and adolescents. No meta-analysis has been conducted on these studies to date. METHODS: Systematic literature searches were carried out to identify all quantitative observational studies that examined the relationship between POS tobacco promotion and individual-level smoking and smoking-related cognitions among children and adolescents, published between January 1990 and June 2014. Random-effects meta-analyses were used. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to extent of tobacco POS advertising environment in the study environment. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to study size and quality. RESULTS: 13 studies met the inclusion criteria; 11 reported data for behavioural outcomes, 6 for cognitive outcomes (each of these assessed smoking susceptibility). The studies were cross-sectional, with the exception of 2 cohort studies. For the behavioural outcomes, the pooled OR was 1.61 (95% CI 1.33 to 1.96) and for smoking susceptibility the pooled OR was 1.32 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.61). CONCLUSIONS: Children and adolescents more frequently exposed to POS tobacco promotion have around 1.6 times higher odds of having tried smoking and around 1.3 times higher odds of being susceptible to future smoking, compared with those less frequently exposed. Together with the available evaluations of POS display bans, the results strongly indicate that legislation banning tobacco POS promotion will effectively reduce smoking among young people. 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/.
INTRODUCTION: Previous systematic reviews have found consistent evidence of a positive association between exposure to point-of-sale (POS) tobacco promotion and increased smoking and smoking susceptibility among children and adolescents. No meta-analysis has been conducted on these studies to date. METHODS: Systematic literature searches were carried out to identify all quantitative observational studies that examined the relationship between POS tobacco promotion and individual-level smoking and smoking-related cognitions among children and adolescents, published between January 1990 and June 2014. Random-effects meta-analyses were used. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to extent of tobacco POS advertising environment in the study environment. Sensitivity analyses were performed according to study size and quality. RESULTS: 13 studies met the inclusion criteria; 11 reported data for behavioural outcomes, 6 for cognitive outcomes (each of these assessed smoking susceptibility). The studies were cross-sectional, with the exception of 2 cohort studies. For the behavioural outcomes, the pooled OR was 1.61 (95% CI 1.33 to 1.96) and for smoking susceptibility the pooled OR was 1.32 (95% CI 1.09 to 1.61). CONCLUSIONS:Children and adolescents more frequently exposed to POS tobacco promotion have around 1.6 times higher odds of having tried smoking and around 1.3 times higher odds of being susceptible to future smoking, compared with those less frequently exposed. Together with the available evaluations of POS display bans, the results strongly indicate that legislation banning tobacco POS promotion will effectively reduce smoking among young people. 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:
Advertising and Promotion; Prevention; Public policy
Authors: Sandra Braun; Erika Nayeli Abad-Vivero; Raúl Mejía; Inti Barrientos; James D Sargent; James F Thrasher Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2018-02-04 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Daniel P Giovenco; Torra E Spillane; Sabeeh A Baig; Sarah E Dumas; Tenzin Yangchen Dongchung; Mike Sanderson; Julia S Sisti; Shannon M Farley; John P Jasek; Amber Levanon Seligson Journal: Health Place Date: 2020-09-15 Impact factor: 4.078
Authors: Katherine A Margolis; Elisabeth A Donaldson; David B Portnoy; Joelle Robinson; Linda J Neff; Ahmed Jamal Journal: Prev Med Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Kurt M Ribisl; Frank J Chaloupka; Thomas R Kirchner; Lisa Henriksen; Destiney S Nettles; Rebecca C Geisler; Tabitha P Hendershot; Gary E Swan Journal: Tob Control Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Heather D'Angelo; Alice Ammerman; Penny Gordon-Larsen; Laura Linnan; Leslie Lytle; Kurt M Ribisl Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2016-07-26 Impact factor: 9.308