Dataset Information

The RICO Verdict and Corrective Statements: Catalysts for Policy Change?

ABSTRACT: Objectives:A federal court ruled tobacco companies violated racketeering laws and ordered them to publish corrective statements. This study assesses effects of exposure to the statements and related court findings on attitudes toward tobacco-related policies and tobacco company influences on policymaking. Methods:We conducted a cross-sectional survey of US adults (N = 2010) prior to publication of the statements. Participants were randomly assigned to the "unexposed" group (N = 1004), which answered attitude questions before reading the statements and court findings, or the "exposed" group (N = 1006), which answered attitude questions after reading the statements and court findings. Results:The exposed group was less likely to think lawmakers should trust tobacco companies as much as other companies (? = -.24, p < .001) or that lawmakers should trust tobacco company lobbyists to provide accurate information (? = -.17, p = .019), compared to the unexposed group. The exposed group also was more likely to support requiring graphic warning labels (? = .15, p = .014) and point-of-sale quitline signs (? = .13, p = .028). Conclusions:Exposure to the statements and court findings may aid tobacco industry denormalization and tobacco-related policy initiatives.

SUBMITTER: Matheny JD

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7039654 | biostudies-literature | 2019 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The RICO Verdict and Corrective Statements: Catalysts for Policy Change?

Matheny James D JD Stevens Elise M EM Chen Sixia S Christiansen Bruce A BA Kowitt Sarah D SD Osman Amira A Vidrine Damon J DJ

Tobacco regulatory science 20190501 3

<h4>Objectives</h4>A federal court ruled tobacco companies violated racketeering laws and ordered them to publish corrective statements. This study assesses effects of exposure to the statements and related court findings on attitudes toward tobacco-related policies and tobacco company influences on policymaking.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a cross-sectional survey of US adults (N = 2010) prior to publication of the statements. Participants were randomly assigned to the "unexposed" group (N = 10 ...[more]

PMID: 32095491

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThree major US tobacco companies were recently ordered to publish corrective statements intended to prevent and restrain further fraud about the health effects of smoking. The court-ordered statements began appearing in newspapers and on television (TV) in late 2017.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to examine the social media dissemination of the tobacco corrective statements during the first 6 months of the implementation of the statements.MethodsWe conducted a descriptive content analysis of Twitter posts using an iterative search strategy through Crimson Hexagon and randomly selected 19.74% (456/2309) of original posts occurring between November 1, 2017, and March 27, 2018, for coding and analysis. We assessed post volume over time, source or author, valence, linked content, and reference to the industry (eg, big tobacco, tobacco industry, and Philip Morris) and media outlet (TV or newspaper). Retweeted content was coded for source/author and prevalence.ResultsMost posts were published in November 2017, surrounding the initial release of the corrective statements. Content was generally neutral (58.7%, 268/456) or positive (33.3%, 152/456) in valence, included links to additional information about the statements (94.9%, 433/456), referred to the industry (87.7%, 400/456), and did not mention a specific media channel on which the statements were aired or published (15%). The majority of original posts were created by individual users (55.2%, 252/456), whereas the majority of retweeted posts were posted by public health organizations (51%). Differences by source are reported, for example, organization posts are more likely to include a link to additional information compared with individual users (P=.03).ConclusionsConversations about the court-ordered corrective statements are taking place on Twitter and are generally neutral or positive in nature. Public health organizations may be increasing the prevalence of these conversations through social media engagement.

Project description:IntroductionDespite being a leading cause of death worldwide, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is underdiagnosed and underprioritized within healthcare systems. Existing healthcare policies should be revisited to include COPD prevention and management as a global priority. Here, we propose and describe health system quality standard position statements that should be implemented as a consistent standard of care for patients with COPD.MethodsA multidisciplinary group of clinicians with expertise in COPD management together with patient advocates from eight countries participated in a quality standards review meeting convened in April 2021. The principal objective was to achieve consensus on global health system priorities to ensure consistent standards of care for COPD. These quality standard position statements were either evidence-based or reflected the combined views of the panel.ResultsOn the basis of discussions, the experts adopted five quality standard position statements, including the rationale for their inclusion, supporting clinical evidence, and essential criteria for quality metrics. These quality standard position statements emphasize the core elements of COPD care, including (1) diagnosis, (2) adequate patient and caregiver education, (3) access to medical and nonmedical treatments aligned with the latest evidence-based recommendations and appropriate management by a respiratory specialist when required, (4) appropriate management of acute COPD exacerbations, and (5) regular patient and caregiver follow-up for care plan reviews.ConclusionsThese practical quality standards may be applicable to and implemented at both local and national levels. While universally applicable to the core elements of appropriate COPD care, they can be adapted to consider differences in healthcare resources and priorities, organizational structure, and care delivery capabilities of individual healthcare systems. We encourage the adoption of these global quality standards by policymakers and healthcare practitioners alike to inform national and regional health system policy revisions to improve the quality and consistency of COPD care worldwide.

Project description:BackgroundGlobal interest and investment in close-to-community health services is increasing. Kenya is currently revising its community health strategy (CHS) alongside political devolution, which will result in revisioning of responsibility for local services. This article aims to explore drivers of policy change from key informant perspectives and to study perceptions of current community health services from community and sub-county levels, including perceptions of what is and what is not working well. It highlights implications for managing policy change.MethodsWe conducted 40 in-depth interviews and 10 focus group discussions with a range of participants to capture plural perspectives, including those who will influence or be influenced by CHS policy change in Kenya (policymakers, sub-county health management teams, facility managers, community health extension worker (CHEW), community health workers (CHWs), clients and community members) in two purposively selected counties: Nairobi and Kitui. Qualitative data were digitally recorded, transcribed, translated and coded before framework analysis.ResultsThere is widespread community appreciation for the existing strategy. High attrition, lack of accountability for voluntary CHWs and lack of funds to pay CHW salaries, combined with high CHEW workload were seen as main drivers for strategy change. Areas for change identified include: lack of clear supervisory structure including provision of adequate travel resources, current uneven coverage and equity of community health services, limited community knowledge about the strategy revision and demand for home-based HIV testing and counselling.ConclusionThis in-depth analysis which captures multiple perspectives results in robust recommendations for strategy revision informed by the Five Wonders of Change Framework. These recommendations point towards a more people-centred health system for improved equity and effectiveness and indicate priority areas for action if success of policy change through the roll-out of the revised strategy is to be realized.

Dataset Information

The RICO Verdict and Corrective Statements: Catalysts for Policy Change?

Publications

The RICO Verdict and Corrective Statements: Catalysts for Policy Change?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets