...
首页> 外文期刊>Drug and alcohol dependence >Equity impact of population-level interventions and policies to reduce smoking in adults: A systematic review
【24h】

Equity impact of population-level interventions and policies to reduce smoking in adults: A systematic review

机译:人口级干预措施和减少成年人吸烟政策的公平影响:系统评价

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background and aims: There is strong evidence about which tobacco control policies reduce smoking. However, their equity impact is uncertain. The aim was to assess the effectiveness of population-level interventions/policies to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in adult smoking.Methods: Systematic review of studies of population-level interventions/policies reporting smoking-related outcomes in adults of lower compared to higher socioeconomic status (SES). References were screened and independently checked. Studies were quality assessed. Results are presented in a narrative synthesis. Equity impact was assessed as: positive (reduced inequality), neutral (no difference by SES), negative (increased inequality), mixed (equity impact varied) or unclear.Results: 117 studies of 130 interventions/policies were included: smokefree (44); price/tax (27); mass media campaigns (30); advertising controls (9); cessation support (9); settings-based interventions (7); multiple policies (4). The distribution of equity, effects was: 33 positive, 36 neutral, 38 negative, 6 mixed, 17 unclear. Most neutral equity studies benefited all SES groups. Fourteen price/tax studies were equity positive. Voluntary, regional and partial smoftefree policies were more likely to be equity negative than national, comprehensive smokefree policies. Mass media campaigns had inconsistent equity effects. Cigarette marketing controls were equity positive or neutral. Targeted national smoking cessation services can be equity positive by achieving higher reach among low SES, compensating for lower quit rates.
机译:背景和目的:有强有力的证据表明哪些烟草控制政策可以减少吸烟。但是,它们对股权的影响尚不确定。目的是评估减少成人吸烟的社会经济不平等的人群干预措施/政策的有效性。方法:系统地审查报告与低社会经济地位相比成年人吸烟相关结果的人群干预措施/政策的研究( SES)​​。筛选参考文献并独立检查。研究进行了质量评估。结果以叙述性综合形式呈现。公平影响的评估为:积极(减少不平等),中立(SES无差异),消极(增加不平等),混合(对平等的影响各不相同)或不清楚。结果:包括130个干预措施/政策的117个研究:无烟(44 );价格/税(27);大众媒体运动(30);广告控制(9);戒烟支持(9);基于环境的干预(7);多种政策(4)。股权分配的影响是:33个积极,36个中立,38个消极,6个混合,17个不清楚。大多数中立的股权研究使所有SES组受益。十四项价格/税项研究对股票持肯定态度。与国家全面无烟政策相比,自愿,区域和部分无烟政策更可能对公平产生负面影响。大众媒体运动产生了不一致的平等效应。香烟的营销控制是股权积极或中立的。有针对性的国家戒烟服务可以通过在低SES中实现更高的覆盖率,补偿较低的戒烟率,从而实现平等。

著录项

获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号