The DOI matches its Crossref record; 112 of the 112 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effect of smoke-free workplaces on smoking behaviour: systematic review
Open accessAbstract
Objective: To quantify the effects of smoke-free workplaces on smoking in employees and compare these effects to those achieved through tax increases. Design: Systematic review with a random effects meta-analysis. Study selection: 26 studies on the effects of smoke-free workplaces Setting: Workplaces in the United States, Australia, Canada, and Germany Participants: Employees in unrestricted and totally smoke-free workplaces Main outcome measures: Daily cigarette consumption (per smoker and per employee) and smoking prevalence Results: Totally smoke-free workplaces are associated with reductions in prevalence of smoking of 3.8% (95% confidence interval 2.8% to 4.7%) and 3.1 (2.4 to 3.8) fewer cigarettes smoked per day per continuing smoker. Combination of the effects of reduced prevalence and lower consumption per continuing smoker yields a mean reduction of 1.3 cigarettes per day per employee, which corresponds to a relative reduction of 29%. To achieve similar reductions the tax on a pack of cigarettes would have to increase from $0.76 to $3.05 (€0.78 to €3.14) in the United States and from £3.44 to £6.59 (€5.32 to €10.20) in the United Kingdom. If all workplacesbecame smoke-free, consumption per capita in the entire population would drop by 4.5% in the United States and 7.6% in the United Kingdom, costing the tobacco industry $1.7 billion and £310 million annually in lost sales. To achieve similar reductions tax per pack would have to increase to $1.11 and £4.26 Conclusions: Smoke-free workplaces not only protect non-smokers from the dangers of passive smoking, they also encourage smokers to quit or to reduce consumption
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Overall, smoke-free workplace policies were associated with a 29% reduction (11%, 53%) in total cigarettes smoked.”
From Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2012) · cites this paper as [424]
In the citing paper
“In a systematic review and meta-analysis including 26 quasi-experimental studies, the implementation of a smoke-free workplace policy was associated with pooled reductions in absolute smoking prevalence of 3.8% (95% CI, 2.8%, 4.7%) and in cigarette consumption among smokers of 3.1 cigarettes per day (2.4, 3.8).”
From Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2012) · cites this paper as [424]
In the citing paper
“Studies with either self-reported (N=3) or biochemical (N=3) measures of exposure to secondhand smoke all found significant reductions in environmental tobacco smoke after implementation of a smoke-free policy.”
From Population Approaches to Improve Diet, Physical Activity, and Smoking Habits: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association (2012) · cites this paper as [424]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
(2000) · Queen Mary Research Online (Queen Mary University of London) · Cited by 1,795
Reducing the Health Consequences of Smoking: 25 Years of Progress. A Report of the Surgeon General.
Heidel, R. E. (1989) · Population and Development Review · doi:10.2307/1973420 · Cited by 1,186
Meta-Analysis, Decision Analysis, and Cost-Effectiveness Analysis
Petitti, D. B. (1999) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195133646.001.0001 · Cited by 918
The health consequences of involuntary smoking : a report of the Surgeon General
Education. Office on Smoking (1986) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 687
Passive smoking and heart disease. Epidemiology, physiology, and biochemistry.
Glantz, S. A., & Parmley, W. W. (1991) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.83.1.1 · Cited by 683
Self-citationPredictors of smoking cessation in a cohort of adult smokers followed for five years
Hymowitz, N., Cummings, K., Hyland, A., Lynn, W., Pechacek, T., & Hartwell, T. (1997) · Tobacco Control · doi:10.1136/tc.6.suppl_2.s57 · Cited by 593
Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs
Control, D. (2014) · Cited by 565
Wakefield, M. A. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7257.333 · Cited by 504
Passive Smoking and Heart Disease
Glantz, S. A. (1995) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.273.13.1047 · Cited by 498
Self-citationThe effects of excise taxes and regulations on cigarette smoking
Wasserman, J., Manning, W. G., Newhouse, J. P., & Winkler, J. D. (1991) · Journal of Health Economics · doi:10.1016/0167-6296(91)90016-g · Cited by 479
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- 10.1001/jama.1990.03450120082034 · DOI
- Project Down Under. Conference Notes. Phillip Morris, 24 June, 1987: Bates Range 2021502102/2134 www.pmdocs.com/PDF/2021502102_2134.PDF (accessed 27 Oct 2001).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
(2009) · Cited by 2,013
E-Cigarettes: A Scientific Review
Grana, R., Benowitz, N., & Glantz, S. A. (2014) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.114.007667 · Cited by 1,194
Self-citationCardiovascular Effects of Secondhand Smoke: Nearly as Large as Smoking
Barnoya, J., & Glantz, S. A. (2005) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/circulationaha.104.492215 · Cited by 939
Self-citationGlobal Effects of Smoking, of Quitting, and of Taxing Tobacco
Jha, P., & Peto, R. (2014) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra1308383 · Cited by 843
Temporal self-regulation theory: A model for individual health behavior
Hall, P. A., & Fong, G. T. (2007) · Health Psychology Review · doi:10.1080/17437190701492437 · Cited by 721
Metadata
- Authors
- Fichtenberg, C. M., & Glantz, S. A.
- Affiliations
- University of California, San Francisco (US)
- Corresponding author
- Glantz, Stanton A
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2002-07-27
- Volume
- 325
- Issue
- 7357
- Pages
- 188
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- PMC
- PMC117445
- OpenAlex
- W2118699725
- Cited by
- 1,072
- References
- 111
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 35 · 2018: 37 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 45 · 2015: 55 · 2014: 53 · 2013: 63 · 2012: 68
- FWCI
- 5.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.bmj.com/company/legal-information/terms-conditions/legal-information/tdm-licencepolicy (tdm)
- Locations
- BMJ (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Cancer Institute (R01CA061021, CA-61021)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Workplace Health and Well-being
- Keywords
- smoke-free workplaces, smoking behavior, tobacco taxation, cigarette consumption, smoking prevalence, workplace smoking policy, passive smoking, smoking cessation
- MeSH terms
- Smoking Prevention, Adolescent, Humans, Smoking, Tobacco Smoke Pollution, Occupational Health, Smoking Cessation, Workplace
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
