Dataset Information

Small-Area Estimation of Smoke-Free Workplace Policies and Home Rules in US Counties.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

The workplace and home are sources of exposure to secondhand smoke, a serious health hazard for nonsmoking adults and children. Smoke-free workplace policies and home rules protect nonsmoking individuals from secondhand smoke and help individuals who smoke to quit smoking. However, estimated population coverages of smoke-free workplace policies and home rules are not typically available at small geographic levels such as counties. Model-based small-area estimation techniques are needed to produce such estimates.

Methods

Self-reported smoke-free workplace policies and home rules data came from the 2014-2015 Tobacco Use Supplement to the Current Population Survey. County-level design-based estimates of the two measures were computed and linked to county-level relevant covariates obtained from external sources. Hierarchical Bayesian models were then built and implemented through Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods.

Results

Model-based estimates of smoke-free workplace policies and home rules were produced for 3134 (of 3143) US counties. In 2014-2015, nearly 80% of US adult workers were covered by smoke-free workplace policies, and more than 85% of US adults were covered by smoke-free home rules. We found large variations within and between states in the coverage of smoke-free workplace policies and home rules.

Conclusions

The small-area modeling approach efficiently reduced the variability that was attributable to small sample size in the direct estimates for counties with data and predicted estimates for counties without data by borrowing strength from covariates and other counties with similar profiles. The county-level modeled estimates can serve as a useful resource for tobacco control research and intervention.

Implications

Detailed county- and state-level estimates of smoke-free workplace policies and home rules can help identify coverage disparities and differential impact of smoke-free legislation and related social norms. Moreover, this estimation framework can be useful for modeling different tobacco control variables and applied elsewhere, for example, to other behavioral, policy, or health related topics.

SUBMITTER: Liu B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8517964 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionParents/guardians can effectively reduce tobacco smoking and secondhand smoke exposure among youth by adopting and enforcing rules against indoor tobacco smoking (ie, home smoke-free policies). We investigate home smoke-free policies from childhood to adolescence in the United States and across rural, suburban, and urban households.Aims and methodsWe analyzed 2019-2020 National Survey of Children's Health data from n = 5,955 parents of youth aged 0-17, living at home with a tobacco smoker in the United States (U.S). Geographical categories were: rural, suburban, and urban. Home smoke-free policy reflected prohibiting tobacco smoking inside the home. Weighted logistic regressions examined the (1) association between youth age and home smoke-free policies, (2) interaction between geographic category and youth age, and (3) differing associations between youth age and home smoke-free policies by geography. Models controlled for youth race, ethnicity, sex, parental education, household annual income, and home structure.ResultsApproximately 13.2% of U.S. households with a smoker did not have a home smoke-free policy. Stratified analyses found one-year increase in youth age was associated with lower odds of having a home smoke-free policy in rural (aOR:0.91; 95%CI: 0.87-0.95) and urban (aOR: 0.96; 95%CI: 0.92-1.00; p = .039), but not suburban (aOR:1.00; 95%CI: 0.95-1.05) households, controlling for covariates.ConclusionOdds of having a smoke-free home in the U.S. declined significantly in rural (9% per year) and urban (4%) but not suburban (0%) households. We quantify declines in home smoke-free policies as children age and identify geographic disparities for this environmental determinant of health.ImplicationsHealth promotion efforts targeting secondhand smoke prevention is needed, particularly for parents of older youth. Furthermore, there is a clear geographic bias in secondhand smoke exposure among all youth particularly older youth. Tailored interventions are needed to address geographic disparities in secondhand smoke exposure among rural and urban youth.

Project description:Low-cost media campaigns increase demand for smoke-free policies in underserved rural areas. The study examined the impact of loss- and gain-framed smoke-free print ads on recall and perceived effectiveness in rural communities, controlling for personal characteristics.Following 6- to 9-month print media campaigns in three rural counties, recall and perceived effectiveness of loss-framed (ie, targeting dangers of secondhand smoke [SHS]) and gain-framed (ie, highlighting positive aspects of smoke-free air) ads were assessed using random-digit-dial phone surveys. Respondents were asked if they remembered each ad, whether they liked it, whether they were prompted to contact a smoke-free coalition, whether the ad made them think, and whether it prompted emotion. Mixed modeling assessed whether personal factors predicted ad recall or perceived effectiveness.Loss-framed ads were less likely to be recalled but more likely to prompt emotion. For ads of both frame types, females reported greater recall and perceived effectiveness than males. Those with less education reported higher perceived effectiveness of the ads but lower recall. Nonsmokers were more likely than smokers to perceive the ads as effective. Knowledge of SHS risk and support for smoke-free workplaces were positively associated with recall and effectiveness.Ad recall and perceived effectiveness were associated with framing and demographic and personal characteristics. Smoke-free efforts in rural areas may be bolstered by continuing to promote benefits of smoke-free workplace policies and educate on SHS risks. Rural areas may need to provide a combination of ad types and framing strategies to appeal to a wide audience.Rural communities are disproportionately affected by SHS and less likely to be protected by smoke-free policies. This study adds evidence-based guidance for tailoring rural smoke-free media campaigns using different framing: gain-framed messages (ie, benefits of smoke-free environments) to promote recall and loss-framed content (ie, dangers of SHS) to prompt emotion. Further, gain-framed messages that are localized to the rural community may be especially effective. Findings support designing smoke-free campaigns in rural communities with the audience in mind by tailoring messages to age, sex, and education level.