Advertising bans as a means of tobacco control policy: a systematic literature review of time-series analyses
Abstract
Objectives This paper reviews the international literature that employed time-series analysis to evaluate the effects of advertising bans on aggregate consumption of cigarettes or tobacco.Methods A systematic search of the literature was conducted. Three groups of studies representing analyses of advertising bans in the U.S.A., in other countries and in 22 OECD countries were defined. The estimated effects of advertising bans and their significance were analysed.Results 24 studies were identified. They used a wide array of explanatory variables, models, estimating methods and data sources. 18 studies found a negative effect of an advertising ban on aggregate consumption, but only ten of these studies found a significant effect. Two studies using data from 22 OECD countries suggested that partial bans would have little or no influence on aggregate consumption, whereas complete bans would significantly reduce consumption.Conclusions The results imply that advertising bans have a negative but sometimes only narrow impact on consumption. Complete bans let expect a higher effectiveness. Because of methodological restrictions of analysing advertising bans' effects by time series approaches, also different approaches should be used in the future.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
More complete advertising and promotional bans are more successful than partial restrictions in both developed and developing countries.
“Because the tobacco industry has become highly skilled at exploiting multiple potential traditional and nontraditional avenues for marketing, more complete advertising and promotional bans are more successful than partial restrictions in both developed and developing countries.479,480”
From Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2012) · cites this paper as [479]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 40 · Cited by 43
- Authors
- Quentin, W., Neubauer, S., Leidl, R., & König, H.-H.
- Affiliations
- Leipzig University (DE)
- Corresponding author
- König, Hans-Helmut
- Venue
- International Journal of Public Health
- Published
- 2007-10
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 295-307
- ISSN
- 0303-8408 (ISSN-L)
- 1661-8556
- 1420-911X
- OpenAlex
- W2043483668
- Cited by
- 43
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 0.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Sozial- und Präventivmedizin (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Site cant be reached (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Public Health Policies and Education
- Keywords
- tobacco advertising ban, tobacco control, cigarette consumption, smoking prevalence, advertising regulation, time series analysis, OECD countries
- MeSH terms
- Smoking Prevention, Advertising, Australia, Cross-Sectional Studies, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Finland, Follow-Up Studies, United Kingdom, Humans, Smoking, United States, Program Evaluation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review