Anti-tobacco television advertising and indicators of smoking cessation in adults: A cohort study

Health Education Research

Volumn 21, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 296-302

  Hyland, A ^a   Wakefield, M ^b   Higbee, Cheryl ^a   Szczypka, G ^c   Cummings, K M ^a  

^a ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY CENTRE   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ADVERTIZING; AGED; ARTICLE; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMMUNITY CARE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA ANALYSIS; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; SMOKING CESSATION; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS; TELEVISION;

ADULT; ADVERTISING; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMANS; INTERVIEWS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; SMOKING CESSATION; TELEVISION; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33645402550     PISSN: 02681153     EISSN: 14653648     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/her/cyh068     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Programs - August 1999. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 1999.
2. Flay BR. Evaluation of the development, dissemination and effectiveness of mass media health programming. Health Educ Res 1987; 2: 123-30.
3. Pierce JP, Dwyer T, Frape G, Chapman S, Chamberlain A, Burke N. Evaluation of the Sydney "Quit for Life" anti-smoking campaign. Med J Aust 1986; 144: 341-4.
4. Pierce JP, Macaskill P, Hill D. Long-term effectiveness of mass-media led antismoking campaigns in Australia. Am J Public Health 1990; 80: 565-9.
5. Mudde AN, De Vries H. The reach and effectiveness of a national mass media-led smoking cessation campaign in the Netherlands. Am J Public Health 1999; 89: 246-350.
6. Wakefield M, Freeman J, Boulter J. Changes associated with the National Tobacco Campaign: pre and post surveys compared. In: Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care (ed.). Australia's National Tobacco Campaign: Evaluation Report, vol. 1. Canberra: CDHAC, 1999, pp. 23-61.
7. McVey D, Stapleton J. Can anti-smoking television advertising affect smoking behaviour? Controlled trial of the Health Education Authority for England's anti-smoking TV campaign. Tob Control 2000; 9: 273-82.
8. McAlister A, Morrison TC, Hu S et al. Media and community campaign effects on adult tobacco use in Texas. J Health Commun 2004; 9: 95-109.
9. Siegel M. Mass media antismoking campaigns: a powerful tool for health promotion. Ann Intern Med 1998; 129: 128-32.
10. Hu T, Keeler TE, Sung H, Barnett PG. The impact of California antismoking legislation on cigarette sales, consumption, and prices. Tob Control 1995; 4(Suppl. 1): S34-8.
11. Balbach ED, Glantz SA. Tobacco control advocates must demand high-quality media campaigns: the California experience. Tob Control 1998; 7: 397-408.
12. Bialous SA, Glantz SA. Arizona's tobacco control initiative demonstrates the need for continuing oversight by tobacco control advocates. Tob Control 1999; 8: 141-51.
13. National Cancer Institute. Smoking and Tobacco Control. Monograph 6. Community-Based Intervention for Smokers: The COMMIT Field Experience. NIH Publication No. 95-4028. US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Cancer Institute, 1995.
14. Szczypka G, Emery S, Wakefield M, Chaloupka F. The adaptation and use of Nielsen Media Research commercial ratings data to measure potential exposure to televised smoking-related advertisements. ImpacTeen Research Paper Series, No. 29. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago, 2003.
15. US Department of Health and Human Services. Reducing Tobacco Use: A Report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health, 2000.
16. Farrelly MC, Pechacek TF, Chaloupka FJ. The impact of tobacco control program expenditures on aggregate cigarette sales: 1981-1998. NBER Working Paper No. 8691, 2001.
17. Friend K, Levy DT. Reductions in smoking prevalence and cigarette consumption associated with mass-media campaigns. Health Educ Res 2002; 17: 85-98.
18. Levy DT, Chaloupka F, Gitchell J. The effects of tobacco control policies on smoking rates: a tobacco control scorecard. J Public Health Manag Pract 2004; 10: 338-53.
19. Dorfman L, Wallack L. Advertising health: the case for counter-ads. Public Health Rep 1993; 108: 716-26.
20. Farrelly MC, Healton CG, Davis KC et al. Getting to the truth: evaluating national tobacco countermarketing campaigns. Am J Public Health 2002; 92: 901-7.
21. Cummings KM, Hyland A, Giovino GA, Hastrup J, Bauer JE, Bansal MA. Are smokers adequately informed about the health risks of smoking and medicinal nicotine? Nicotine Tob Res 2004; 6: S333-40.
22. Cummings KM, Hyland A, Bansal MA, Giovino GA. What do Marlboro Light smokers know about low-tar cigarettes? Nicotine Tob Res 2004; 6: S323-32.
23. Borland R, Yong H, King B et al. Use and beliefs about light cigarettes in four countries: findings from the International Tobacco Control Policy Evaluation Survey. Nicotine Tob Res 2004; 6: S311-21.
24. Weinstein ND, Slovic P, Gibson G. Accuracy and optimism in smokers' beliefs about quitting. Nicotine Tob Res 2004; 6: S375-80.