Cited by 12Smoking Behavior and CessationGlobal Public Health Policies and EpidemiologyPublic Health Policies and Education

Is workplace smoking policy equally prevalent and equally effective among immigrants?

Open access
Osypuk, T L, Subramanian, S V, Kawachi, I, Acevedo-Garcia, D·2009·Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Abstract

Background: This study examined whether immigrants were less likely to be covered by a smoke-free workplace policy and whether workplace smoking policies garnered comparable associations with smoking for immigrants and for those born in the USA. Methods: Investigators applied multiple logistic regression to the 2001–2 Current Population Survey Tobacco Use Supplement among US indoor workers (n = 85 784). The study examined first, whether nativity (immigrants vs US born) was independently associated with smoke-free policy coverage, and second, whether the smoke-free policy association with current smoking was differential by nativity (effect modification). Results: Immigrants were less likely to work in smoke-free workplaces than those born in the USA; however, occupation and industry accounted for these disparities. Employment in a workplace that was not smoke free was associated with higher odds of smoking (vs smoke-free workplaces), both before (OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.74 to 1.92) and after (OR 1.36, CI 1.29 to 1.44) covariate adjustment among the US born, but associations were weaker among immigrants (OR 1.39, CI 1.20 to 1.61, unadjusted; OR 1.15 CI 0.97 to 1.35 adjusted). Worker industry partly explained (16% of) the weaker policy-smoking association among immigrants, while other socioeconomic variables reduced the policy-smoking association without explaining the disparity. Conclusions: The patchwork of US workplace smoking restriction policy at different governmental levels, combined with a voluntary regime among some employers, generates coverage inequalities. Workplace smoke-free policies may be less effective for immigrants, and this is related to differential coverage by such policies due to occupational segregation. Understanding the complex patterns of the social context of smoking is important for understanding how policy interventions might have heterogeneous effects for different demographic groups.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1136/jech.2008.079475

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • In cross-sectional analyses in Japan, the United States, and Switzerland, employees at sites with more restrictive smoke-free policies were less likely to be current smokers and, when assessed, smoked fewer cigarettes per day if they were still active smokers.

    “In cross-sectional analyses in Japan, the United States, and Switzerland, employees at sites with more restrictive smoke-free policies were less likely to be current smokers and, when assessed, smoked fewer cigarettes per day if they were still active smokers.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [31]Giovino GA Pederson LL Trosclair A The Prevalence of Selected Cigarette Smoking Behaviors by Occupational Class in the United States 2000 Presented at the Organized Labor, Public Health, and Tobacco Control Policy Conference
  2. [33]Maryland Occupational Safety and Health Prohibition on Smoking in an Enclosed Workplace - Compliance Guidelines for the Hospitality Industry COMAR 09.12.23 and Chapter 5, Acts of 1995 Maryland Occupational Safety and Health 1995 Baltimore, MD

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Osypuk, T. L., Subramanian, S. V., Kawachi, I., & Acevedo-Garcia, D.
Affiliations
  • Northeastern University (US)
  • Harvard University (US)
Corresponding author
Osypuk, T L
Venue
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2009-04-08
Volume
63
Issue
10
Pages
784-791
ISSN
  • 0141-7681 (ISSN-L)
  • 0143-005X
  • 1470-2738
OpenAlex
W2017719254
Cited by
12
References
31
Citations by year
2021: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5k25hl081275-05, 1r03ca093198-01)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (K25 HL081275), 1 K25 HL081275)
  • National Cancer Institute (R03 CA093198, 1 R03 CA093198-01)
  • National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (U19AI142735)
  • National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities (L60 MD001969)
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
workplace smoking policy, smoke-free workplaces, immigrants, nativity, smoking prevalence, occupational segregation, industry differences, policy effectiveness, health disparities, social context of smoking, tobacco control
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Cross-Cultural Comparison, Female, Health Policy, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Smoking, Tobacco Smoke Pollution, United States, Logistic Models, Odds Ratio, Emigrants and Immigrants, Young Adult

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