Titre :
|
Cigarette prices, smoking, and the poor : Implications of recent trends. (2007)
|
Auteurs :
|
Peter FRANKS ;
Alan CHIEM ;
JERANT (Anthony-F) : USA. Department of Family and Community Medicine. School of Medicine. University of California. Davis. ;
Dennis LEE ;
Sandy LEE ;
Jpaul LEIGH ;
Ilene LEWIS ;
Center for Health Services Research in Primary Care. School of Medicine. University of California. Davis. USA ;
University of California. Davis. USA
|
Type de document :
|
Article
|
Dans :
|
American journal of public health (vol. 97, n° 10, 2007)
|
Pagination :
|
1873-1877
|
Langues:
|
Anglais
|
Mots-clés :
|
Tabagisme
;
Prix
;
Tendance séculaire
;
Cigarette
;
Homme
|
Résumé :
|
[BDSP. Notice produite par INIST-CNRS R0xGk7Ar. Diffusion soumise à autorisation]. Objective. We examined the relationship between smoking participation and cigarette pack price by income group and time period to determine role of cigarette prices in income-related disparities in smoking in the United States. Methods. We used data from the 1984-2004 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System surveys linked to information on cigarette prices to examine the adjusted prevalence of smoking participation and smoking participation-cigarette pack price elasticity (change in percentage of persons smoking relative to a 1% change in cigarette price) by income group (lowest income quartile [lower] vs all other quartiles [higher]) and time period (before vs after the Master Settlement Agreement [MSA]). Results. Increased real cigarette-pack price overtime was associated with a marked decline in smoking among higher-income but not among lower-income persons. Although the pre-MSA association between cigarette pack price and smoking revealed a larger elasticity in the lower-versus higher-income persons (-0.45 vs - 0.22), the post-MSA association was not statistically significant (P>. 2) for either income group. Conclusions. Despite cigarette price increases after the MSA, income-related smoking disparities have increased. Increasing cigarette prices may no longer be an effective policy tool and may impose a disproportionate burden on poor smokers.
|