A thematic content analysis of 2010-2015 state tobacco control legislation in the United States: Bill rationales and priority populations

被引:1
作者
Kong, Amanda Y. [1 ,2 ]
Tao, Vivian Qingzi [3 ]
Golden, Shelley D. [3 ,4 ]
机构
[1] Univ Oklahoma, Hlth Sci Ctr, Dept Family & Prevent Med, 800 Stanton L Young Blvd, Oklahoma City, OK 73117 USA
[2] Univ Oklahoma, TSET Hlth Promot Res Ctr, Stephenson Canc Ctr, Hlth Sci Ctr, 655 Res Pkwy 400, Oklahoma City, OK 73104 USA
[3] Univ N Carolina, Dept Hlth Behav, 170 Rosenau Hall,135 Dauer Dr, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
[4] Univ N Carolina, Lineberger Comprehens Canc Ctr, 450 West Dr, Chapel Hill, NC 27599 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Tobacco control; Legal epidemiology; Policy analysis; State legislation; Health policy; Priority populations; Health equity; PUBLIC-HEALTH; CONTROL POLICIES; PREVALENCE; PREEMPTION; POLITICS; SMOKING; IMPACT;
D O I
10.1016/j.pmedr.2023.102446
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
ABS T R A C T Objective: Tobacco use causes numerous types of cancers, heart diseases, and chronic illnesses, and is responsible for nearly 1 in every 5 deaths in the United States (U.S.) annually. This study assessed whether tobacco control laws introduced in state legislatures between 2010 and 2015 provided a rationale for the proposed bill and/or specified priority population groups, and we then examined emerging themes in the text that did so.Methods: Using LexisNexis (R) State Net (R), we identified tobacco control bills introduced in all states and coded their bill rationales and population category. We then conducted qualitative thematic analysis on a sample of bills with rationales or specified populations. Results: Of the 2815 tobacco control bills introduced in state legislatures in the analysis period, 422 (15.0%) included a bill rationale, and 1309 (46.5%) specified at least one priority population. Four overarching themes emerged: 1) Addressing tobacco-related health harms and financial costs incurred to society; 2) Protecting the public from tobacco-related harms as a government responsibility; 3) Providing services to priority populations; 4) Exempting or preempting some population groups and localities.Conclusions: Rationalizing tobacco control legislation by focusing on both health and cost implications was a key feature of tobacco policy bill text we analyzed; given the history of this approach, it is likely to remain so in the future. Our study may serve as a benchmark for tracking current and future tobacco control legislation to examine whether there is a growth in prioritizing populations experiencing unjust burdens of tobacco use and related disease.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 46 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], 2020, Current Cigarette Smoking Among Adults in the United States
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2014, Reports of the Surgeon General
  • [3] Why the World Will Never Be Tobacco-Free: Reframing "Tobacco Control" Into a Traditional Tobacco Movement
    Boudreau, Gina
    Hernandez, Carol
    Hoffer, Donna
    Preuss, Kathleen Starlight
    Tibbetts-Barto, Linda
    Villaluz, Nicole Toves
    Scott, Sheryl
    [J]. AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH, 2016, 106 (07) : 1188 - 1195
  • [4] cdc, 2019, American Indians/Alaska Natives and Tobacco Use
  • [5] cdc, 2020, Health Disparities Related to Commercial Tobacco and Advancing Health Equity
  • [6] cdc, 2020, Health Effects of Secondhand Smoke
  • [7] cdc, 2021, Secondhand Smoke (SHS) Facts
  • [8] cdc, 2017, Health Effects of Smoking and Tobacco Use
  • [9] cdc, 2021, Burden of Tobacco Use in the U.S
  • [10] E-cigarette prevalence and correlates of use among adolescents versus adults: A review, and comparison
    Chapman, Shawna L. Carroll
    Wu, Li-Tzy
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PSYCHIATRIC RESEARCH, 2014, 54 : 43 - 54