Dvora Shmulewitz1,2, Malka Stohl2, Katherine M Keyes3, Qiana Brown3, Tulshi D Saha4, Deborah Hasin1,2,3. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY. 2. Clinical Phenomenology, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York, NY. 3. Department of Epidemiology, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia University, New York, NY. 4. Laboratory of Epidemiology and Biometry, National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, Bethesda, MD.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: To better understand the impact of the state-level tobacco environment (eg, tobacco control policies, attitudes towards smoking) on cigarette smoking, we examined whether the relationship of state tobacco environments to smoking is modified by individual-level vulnerability factors. METHODS: In a nationally representative sample of US adults (N = 34 638), past-year smoking and heavy smoking were examined. State-level tobacco environment was defined by tobacco-related control policies and attitudes, ranging from permissive to restrictive; individual vulnerability was defined by childhood maltreatment and/or parental substance problems. Additive interaction tested differences in state-level tobacco environment effects on smoking and heavy smoking by individual-level vulnerability. RESULTS: Significant interactions (P values < .01) indicated that the state tobacco environment had the strongest relationship to smoking outcomes among individuals with greatest individual vulnerability. For example, among respondents with childhood maltreatment and parental substance problems, those in states with permissive tobacco environments had 13.3% greater prevalence of smoking than those in restrictive states. Among respondents with neither individual-level risk factor, those in permissive states had 2.8% greater prevalence than those in restrictive states (interaction P value = .0002). CONCLUSIONS: Further restricting states' smoking environments could help reduce the prevalence of smoking and heavy smoking, particularly among those at increased individual risk in the general population. IMPLICATIONS: This study shows that the protective effect of restrictive state-level tobacco environments on smoking or heavy smoking was stronger among those especially vulnerable due to individual-level risk factors (parental substance problems, childhood maltreatment). Thus, public health campaigns to influence attitudes towards smoking or legislation to strengthen tobacco control could have a broad effect, particularly impacting those with vulnerability to smoking, which may help decrease smoking prevalence and reduce the massive public health burden of tobacco-related morbidity and mortality.
INTRODUCTION: To better understand the impact of the state-level tobacco environment (eg, tobacco control policies, attitudes towards smoking) on cigarette smoking, we examined whether the relationship of state tobacco environments to smoking is modified by individual-level vulnerability factors. METHODS: In a nationally representative sample of US adults (N = 34 638), past-year smoking and heavy smoking were examined. State-level tobacco environment was defined by tobacco-related control policies and attitudes, ranging from permissive to restrictive; individual vulnerability was defined by childhood maltreatment and/or parental substance problems. Additive interaction tested differences in state-level tobacco environment effects on smoking and heavy smoking by individual-level vulnerability. RESULTS: Significant interactions (P values < .01) indicated that the state tobacco environment had the strongest relationship to smoking outcomes among individuals with greatest individual vulnerability. For example, among respondents with childhood maltreatment and parental substance problems, those in states with permissive tobacco environments had 13.3% greater prevalence of smoking than those in restrictive states. Among respondents with neither individual-level risk factor, those in permissive states had 2.8% greater prevalence than those in restrictive states (interaction P value = .0002). CONCLUSIONS: Further restricting states' smoking environments could help reduce the prevalence of smoking and heavy smoking, particularly among those at increased individual risk in the general population. IMPLICATIONS: This study shows that the protective effect of restrictive state-level tobacco environments on smoking or heavy smoking was stronger among those especially vulnerable due to individual-level risk factors (parental substance problems, childhood maltreatment). Thus, public health campaigns to influence attitudes towards smoking or legislation to strengthen tobacco control could have a broad effect, particularly impacting those with vulnerability to smoking, which may help decrease smoking prevalence and reduce the massive public health burden of tobacco-related morbidity and mortality.
Authors: Elliot C Nelson; Andrew C Heath; Michael T Lynskey; Kathleen K Bucholz; Pamela A F Madden; Dixie J Statham; Nicholas G Martin Journal: Psychol Med Date: 2006-07-20 Impact factor: 7.723
Authors: Jeffrey F Scherrer; Hong Xian; Hui Pan; Michele L Pergadia; Pamela A F Madden; Julia D Grant; Carolyn E Sartor; Jon Randolph Haber; Theodore Jacob; Kathleen K Bucholz Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2011-10-15 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Shanta R Dube; Vincent J Felitti; Maxia Dong; Daniel P Chapman; Wayne H Giles; Robert F Anda Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: D P Bernstein; L Fink; L Handelsman; J Foote; M Lovejoy; K Wenzel; E Sapareto; J Ruggiero Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 1994-08 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Bridget F Grant; Deborah A Dawson; Frederick S Stinson; Patricia S Chou; Ward Kay; Roger Pickering Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2003-07-20 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Ramin Mojtabai; Kira E Riehm; Joanna E Cohen; G Caleb Alexander; Jon S Vernick; Johannes Thrul Journal: Prev Med Date: 2020-04-22 Impact factor: 4.018