scholarly journals The COVID-19 pandemic and tobacco use among young population: A scoping review

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement) ◽  
Author(s):  
Majlinda Zahaj ◽  
Jorgjia Bucaj ◽  
Dafina Bucaj ◽  
Sonila Nika ◽  
Vasilika Prifti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Young Population

scholarly journals A scoping review and meta-analysis of psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for cannabis and tobacco use among African Americans.

2017 ◽  
Vol 31 (8) ◽  
pp. 922-943 ◽  
Author(s):  
LaTrice Montgomery ◽  
Cendrine Robinson ◽  
Elizabeth L. Seaman ◽  
Angela M. Haeny
Keyword(s):  
African Americans ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Pharmacological Treatments

scholarly journals Tobacco use cessation interventions for lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and queer youth and young adults: A scoping review

2017 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 53-62 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Bruce Baskerville ◽  
Darly Dash ◽  
Alanna Shuh ◽  
Katy Wong ◽  
Aneta Abramowicz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Tobacco Use Cessation ◽  
Queer Youth ◽  
Youth And Young Adults

scholarly journals The Intersection of Food Insecurity and Tobacco Use: A Scoping Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 124S-138S ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin E. Kim-Mozeleski ◽  
Rajshree Pandey
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Food Insecurity ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Underserved Populations ◽  
The United States ◽  
Outcome Variable ◽  
Clinical Samples ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
General Populations

Cigarette smoking is increasingly concentrated in socioeconomically disadvantaged groups, and food insecurity also disproportionately affects lower-income groups. Recent studies have suggested that smoking and food insecurity operate as risk factors for one another, but there is limited understanding of their intersection. This scoping review aimed to synthesize the published literature on the association between food insecurity and tobacco use across population groups in the United States and Canada. We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and PsycINFO using key words. Studies included were published in English between 2008 and 2018, reported empirical findings, measured both tobacco use and food insecurity, and considered either variable as a study outcome. Nineteen articles were identified; 6 examined tobacco use as an outcome variable and 13 examined food insecurity as an outcome variable. Most articles were of studies using cross-sectional designs. Study samples ranged from general populations, clinical samples, and underserved populations. For each article, we extracted information including specific findings related to the association between food insecurity and tobacco use. We synthesized the current research by formulating a model by which food insecurity and tobacco use are bidirectionally associated. This scoping review concludes that the co-occurrence of food insecurity and tobacco use exists across populations in the United States and Canada. As the evidence is largely from cross-sectional investigations, there is a need for longer term, comprehensive assessments of relationships between tobacco use and food insecurity. Such investigations can inform policies and interventions aimed toward addressing the inequitable burden of tobacco use and of food insecurity among disadvantaged populations.

scholarly journals OA10.03 Reporting of Tobacco Use and Impact on Outcomes in Cancer Cooperative Group Clinical Trials: A Systematic Scoping Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. S123-S124
Author(s):  
L. Eng ◽  
J. Brual ◽  
A. Nagee ◽  
S. Mok ◽  
R. Fazelzad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Cooperative Group

scholarly journals A Scoping Review of Foci, Trends, and Gaps in Reviews of Tobacco Control Research

2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (5) ◽  
pp. 599-612 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gayle Halas ◽  
Annette S H Schultz ◽  
Janet Rothney ◽  
Pamela Wener ◽  
Maxine Holmqvist ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Tobacco Industry ◽  
World Health ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Individual Choice ◽  
Product Regulation ◽  
Control Research ◽  
Review Of Reviews

Abstract Introduction The burden of disease associated with tobacco use has prompted a substantial increase in tobacco-related research, but the breadth of this literature has not been comprehensively examined. This review examines the nature of the research addressing the action areas in World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), the populations targeted and how equity-related concepts are integrated. Method A scoping review of published reviews addressing tobacco control within the primary prevention domain. We searched PubMed, Scopus, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Cochrane Library, Educational Resources Information Centre, and PsycInfo from 2004 to 2018. Results The scoping review of reviews offered a “birds-eye-view” of the tobacco control literature. Within the 681 reviews meeting inclusion criteria, there was a strong focus on smoking cessation targeting individuals; less attention has been given to product regulation, packaging, and labeling or sales to minors. Equity-related concepts were addressed in 167/681 (24.5%); few were focused on addressing inequity through structural and systemic root causes. Conclusion This analysis of foci, trends, and gaps in the research pursuant to the FCTC illustrated the particular action areas and populations most frequently addressed in tobacco control research. Further research is needed to address: (1) underlying social influences, (2) particular action areas and with specific populations, and (3) sustained tobacco use through the influence of novel marketing and product innovations by tobacco industry. Implications This scoping review of the breadth of tobacco control research reviews enables a better understanding of which action areas and target populations have been addressed in the research. Our findings alongside recommendations from other reviews suggest prioritizing further research to support policymaking and considering the role of the tobacco industry in circumventing tobacco control efforts. The large amount of research targeting individual cessation would suggest there is a need to move beyond a focus on individual choice and decontextualized behaviors. Also, given the majority of reviews that simply recognize or describe disparity, further research that integrates equity and targets various forms of social exclusion and discrimination is needed and may benefit from working in collaboration with communities where programs can be tailored to need and context.

Reporting of tobacco use and impact on outcomes in cancer cooperative group clinical trials: A systematic scoping review.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 40-40
Author(s):  
Lawson Eng ◽  
Janette Brual ◽  
Ahsas Nagee ◽  
Spencer Mok ◽  
Rouhi Fazelzad ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Head And Neck ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Significant Heterogeneity ◽  
Cooperative Group ◽  
The Impact

40 Background: Continued smoking after a diagnosis of cancer negatively impacts cancer outcomes but the impact of tobacco on many innovative treatments has not yet been well established. Collecting and evaluating tobacco use in cancer clinical trials may advance understanding of the consequences of tobacco use on specific treatment modalities. We performed a systematic scoping review of the frequency of reporting and analysis of tobacco use in clinical trials run by cancer cooperative clinical trial groups. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted to identify cancer cooperative group clinical trials published from January 2017 to October 2019 using Medline, Epub Ahead of Print and In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials using OvidSP. Eligible studies evaluated either systemic and/or radiation therapies, involved at least one cancer cooperative group, included > 100 adult patients and reported on at least one primary or secondary endpoint, which included overall survival (OS), disease/progression-free survival (DFS/PFS), response rates, toxicities/adverse events, or quality of life (QoL). Secondary analyses of previously published trials were excluded. Results: Among 14843 identified studies, 91 studies representing 90 trials met inclusion criteria. 24% were phase II trials, 2% phase II/III and 74% phase III. Trial start dates ranged from 1995-2015 with most (29%) between 2007-2008; median trial sample size was 406 (range: 100-4994); 86% involved systematic therapy, 35% involved radiation; 14% were lung and 5% were head and neck trials. 51% of trials had a curative intent, 33% were palliative and 16% involved hematologic cancers. 74 studies reported on OS, 73 DFS/PFS, and 88 toxicity/QoL. 19 studies reported baseline tobacco use information, while two reported collecting follow-up tobacco use. Of those collecting baseline tobacco use, only 7 reported any analysis of the impact of tobacco on clinical outcomes. There was significant heterogeneity in the reporting of baseline tobacco use: 5 reported never/ever status, 10 reported never/ex-smoker/current smoker status; 4 reported some measure of smoking intensity; none reported on verifying smoking status or second hand smoke exposure. Trials of tobacco related (lung and head and neck) cancers were more likely to report baseline tobacco use compared to non-tobacco related cancers (83% vs 6% p < 0.001). Conclusions: Few cancer cooperative group clinical trials report and analyze trial participants’ baseline tobacco use, and even fewer collect follow up information. Significant heterogeneity exists in reporting tobacco use. Routine standardized collection and reporting of tobacco use, both at baseline and follow up in clinical trials, should be implemented to enable investigators to evaluate the clinical impact of tobacco use on new cancer therapies.

scholarly journals Use of implementation science in tobacco control intervention studies in the USA between 2000 and 2020: a scoping review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (11) ◽  
pp. e038617
Author(s):  
Rebecca Selove ◽  
Sarah Neil-Sztramko ◽  
Jennifer Leng ◽  
Philip D Walker ◽  
Ramzi George Salloum ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Tobacco Control ◽  
Implementation Science ◽  
Tobacco Use ◽  
Scoping Review ◽  
English Language ◽  
Experimental Studies ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
The Usa

AbstractIntroductionDespite continuing efforts to reduce tobacco use in the USA, decline in smoking rates have stalled and smoking remains a major contributor to preventable death. Implementation science could potentially improve uptake and impact of evidence-based tobacco control interventions; however, no previous studies have systematically examined how implementation science has been used in this field. Our scoping review will describe the use of implementation science in tobacco control in the USA, identify relevant gaps in research and suggest future directions for implementation science application to tobacco control.Methods and analysisOur team, including a medical research librarian, will conduct a scoping review guided primarily by Arksey and O’Malley’s methodology. We will search English language peer-reviewed literature published from 2000 to 31 December 2020 for terms synonymous with ‘tobacco use’, ‘prevention’, ‘cessation’ and ‘implementation science’. The databases included in this search are MEDLINE (PubMed), Embase (Ovid), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), PsycINFO (ProQuest), ERIC (ProQuest) and the Cochrane Library (Wiley). We will include cohort and quasi-experimental studies, single-group experiments and randomised trials that report qualitative and/or quantitative data related to applying implementation science to the planning and/or delivery of interventions to prevent or decrease the use of tobacco products. Studies must target potential or active tobacco users, intervention providers such as educators or healthcare professionals, or US policy-makers. A minimum of two reviewers will independently examine each title and abstract for relevance, and each eligible full text for inclusion and analysis. Use of implementation science, demonstrated by explicit reference to implementation frameworks, strategies or outcomes, will be extracted from included studies and summarised.Ethics and disseminationThis study is exempt from ethics board approval. We will document the equity-orientation of included studies with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-Equity Extension checklist. Results will be submitted for conferences and peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberOpen Science Framework Registry (6YRK8).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document