Effectiveness of tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship bans on smoking prevalence, initiation and cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Christina Saad, Brandon Hsu-Chen Cheng, Ryo Takamizawa, Arya Thakur, Chae-Weon Lee, Lachlan Leung, J Lennert Veerman, Leopold Ndemnge Aminde
{"title":"Effectiveness of tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship bans on smoking prevalence, initiation and cessation: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Christina Saad, Brandon Hsu-Chen Cheng, Ryo Takamizawa, Arya Thakur, Chae-Weon Lee, Lachlan Leung, J Lennert Veerman, Leopold Ndemnge Aminde","doi":"10.1136/tc-2024-058903","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Bans on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship (TAPS) have the potential to influence smoking behaviour. However, many countries are yet to implement such strategies.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to synthesise contemporary evidence on the effectiveness of TAPS bans on smoking prevalence, initiation and cessation.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched up to 11 April 2024. Sixteen eligible studies were included.</p><p><strong>Data selection and extraction: </strong>Two reviewers independently screened each study and extracted relevant data. Quality assessment was performed in duplicate using the ROBINS-I tool. Discrepancies were resolved via consensus or a third reviewer. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for reasonably comparable studies.</p><p><strong>Data synthesis: </strong>The meta-analyses showed that TAPS bans were associated with a lower prevalence of current smoking (pooled OR= 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup>=98.7%) and a reduced risk of smoking initiation (pooled HR=0.63, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.82, <i>I</i> <sup>2</sup>=95%). There was no association between TAPS bans and smoking cessation (pooled OR=1.10, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.40, <i>I<sup>2</sup></i> =58.5%). Subgroup analyses revealed the effects of TAPS bans on smoking prevalence differed by duration of evaluation (p<0.01).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This review showed that TAPS bans were associated with a 20% lower odds of current smoking and a 37% reduced risk of smoking initiation. The available evidence suggests that TAPS bans influence smoking behaviour, which strengthens calls for the implementation and enforcement of these policies.</p>","PeriodicalId":23145,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Control","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/tc-2024-058903","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Bans on tobacco advertising, promotion and sponsorship (TAPS) have the potential to influence smoking behaviour. However, many countries are yet to implement such strategies.

Objective: This study aimed to synthesise contemporary evidence on the effectiveness of TAPS bans on smoking prevalence, initiation and cessation.

Data sources: Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science databases were searched up to 11 April 2024. Sixteen eligible studies were included.

Data selection and extraction: Two reviewers independently screened each study and extracted relevant data. Quality assessment was performed in duplicate using the ROBINS-I tool. Discrepancies were resolved via consensus or a third reviewer. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted for reasonably comparable studies.

Data synthesis: The meta-analyses showed that TAPS bans were associated with a lower prevalence of current smoking (pooled OR= 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95, I 2=98.7%) and a reduced risk of smoking initiation (pooled HR=0.63, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.82, I 2=95%). There was no association between TAPS bans and smoking cessation (pooled OR=1.10, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.40, I2 =58.5%). Subgroup analyses revealed the effects of TAPS bans on smoking prevalence differed by duration of evaluation (p<0.01).

Conclusions: This review showed that TAPS bans were associated with a 20% lower odds of current smoking and a 37% reduced risk of smoking initiation. The available evidence suggests that TAPS bans influence smoking behaviour, which strengthens calls for the implementation and enforcement of these policies.

烟草广告、促销和赞助禁令对吸烟率、开始吸烟和戒烟的效果:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
背景:禁止烟草广告、促销和赞助(TAPS)有可能影响吸烟行为。然而,许多国家尚未实施这种战略。目的:本研究旨在综合当代证据,证明TAPS禁令对吸烟流行、开始吸烟和戒烟的有效性。数据来源:Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library和Web of Science数据库检索截止到2024年4月11日。纳入了16项符合条件的研究。数据选择和提取:两名审稿人独立筛选每项研究并提取相关数据。使用ROBINS-I工具进行一式两份的质量评估。差异通过协商一致或第三方审稿人解决。对具有合理可比性的研究进行随机效应荟萃分析。数据综合:荟萃分析显示,TAPS禁令与较低的当前吸烟率(合并OR= 0.80, 95% CI 0.68至0.95,i2 =98.7%)和较低的开始吸烟风险(合并HR=0.63, 95% CI 0.48至0.82,i2 =95%)相关。禁止使用TAPS与戒烟之间没有关联(合并OR=1.10, 95% CI 0.86 ~ 1.40, I2 =58.5%)。亚组分析显示,TAPS禁令对吸烟率的影响因评估持续时间的不同而不同(结论:本综述显示,TAPS禁令与当前吸烟几率降低20%和开始吸烟风险降低37%相关。现有证据表明,TAPS禁令影响吸烟行为,这加强了对实施和执行这些政策的呼吁。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Tobacco Control
Tobacco Control 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
26.90%
发文量
223
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Tobacco Control is an international peer-reviewed journal covering the nature and consequences of tobacco use worldwide; tobacco''s effects on population health, the economy, the environment, and society; efforts to prevent and control the global tobacco epidemic through population-level education and policy changes; the ethical dimensions of tobacco control policies; and the activities of the tobacco industry and its allies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信