Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2000 Aug 5;321(7257):333-7.
doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7257.333.

Effect of restrictions on smoking at home, at school, and in public places on teenage smoking: cross sectional study

M A Wakefield  1 , F J Chaloupka, N J Kaufman, C T Orleans, D C Barker, E E Ruel
Affiliations

Effect of restrictions on smoking at home, at school, and in public places on teenage smoking: cross sectional study

M A Wakefield et al. BMJ. .

Erratum in

  • BMJ 2000 Sep 9;31(7261):623

Abstract

Objective: To determine the relation between extent of restrictions on smoking at home, at school, and in public places and smoking uptake and smoking prevalence among school students.

Design: Cross sectional survey with merged records of extent of restrictions on smoking in public places.

Setting: United States.

Participants: 17 287 high school students.

Main outcome measures: Five point scale of smoking uptake; 30 day smoking prevalence.

Results: More restrictive arrangements on smoking at home were associated with a greater likelihood of being in an earlier stage of smoking uptake (P<0.05) and a lower 30 day prevalence (odds ratio 0.79 (95% confidence interval 0.67 to 0.91), P<0.001). These findings applied even when parents were smokers. More pervasive restrictions on smoking in public places were associated with a higher probability of being in a earlier stage of smoking uptake (P<0.05) and lower 30 day prevalence (0.91 (0.83 to 0.99), P=0.03). School smoking bans were related to a greater likelihood of being in an earlier stage of smoking uptake (0.89 (0.85 to 0.99), P<0.05) and lower prevalence (0. 86 (0.77 to 0.94), P<0.001) only when the ban was strongly enforced, as measured by instances when teenagers perceived that most or all students obeyed the rule.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that restrictions on smoking at home, more extensive bans on smoking in public places, and enforced bans on smoking at school may reduce teenage smoking.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure
Figure
Survey sampling strategy
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

  • Protecting children from passive smoking.
    Ferrence R, Ashley MJ. Ferrence R, et al. BMJ. 2000 Aug 5;321(7257):310-1. doi: 10.1136/bmj.321.7257.310. BMJ. 2000. PMID: 10926567 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

References

    1. Chapman S, Borland R, Scollo M, Brownson RC, Dominello A, Woodward S. The impact of smoke-free workplaces on declining cigarette consumption in Australia and the United States. Am J Public Health. 1999;89:1018–1023. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Farkas AJ, Gilpin EA, Distefan JM, Pierce JP. The effects of household and workplace smoking restrictions on quitting behaviors. Tobacco Control. 1999;8:261–265. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gilpin EA, White MM, Farkas AJ, Pierce JP. Home smoking restrictions: which smokers have them and how they are associated with smoking behavior. Nicotine Tobacco Res. 1999;1:153–162. - PubMed
    1. Pierce JP, Gilpin EA, Emery SL, Farkas AJ, Zhu SH, Choi WS, et al. Tobacco control in California: who's winning the war? An evaluation of the tobacco control program, 1989-1996. La Jolla, CA: University of California, San Diego; 1998. http://ssdc.ucsd.edu/tobacco/reports/
    1. Borland R, Mullins R, Trotter L, White V. Trends in environmental tobacco smoke restrictions in the home in Victoria, Australia. Tobacco Control. 1999;8:266–271. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

Substances