An analysis of the groups of people smoking in public places

smoking ban in public places

This group represents a wide range of smoking patterns among the general population and particularly among college students [ 30 ]. Prior to beginning the focus groups, participants read and signed an informed consent and completed a brief questionnaire assessing demographics and smoking behavior using questions similar to those described above.

Methods We employed a mixed methods approach to evaluate the policy in context as has been performed recently in other studies examining bylaw restrictions in New York City [ 25 ].

There is a gender difference in prevalence: Hence, we considered such equity issues using Mahoney et al.

Benefits of banning smoking in public places

All sessions were audiotaped, transcribed and observed by a research assistant. One Park Board councillor even questioned whether there was any need to hold a discussion prior to voting for the bylaw, presumably because it was felt that the case for supporting it was so transparently sound. Students received up to three e-mails containing a link to the consent form with the option of declining participation. Qualitative findings indicated support for smoke-free policies in public albeit greater support for those in restaurants versus bars and on campus. We particularly wanted to understand the processes of policy adoption, support, compliance, and enforcement from the perspective of health equity. We adopted Critical Multiplism [ 26 ] as the methodological frame for the study, which acknowledges that different research methods contain weaknesses and biases which necessitate the use of multiple methodological approaches to minimize the influence of any single bias. Background In , smoking prevalence in the Vancouver Health Authority, which includes the City of Vancouver, was Several studies have further established that lower socioeconomic status SES is significantly predicts poor smoking cessation [ 31 ]. Data analysis Qualitative data were analyzed according to the principles outlined in Morgan and Krueger [ 45 ]. We assessed marital status, place of residence i. To what extent is the bylaw being supported and adhered to? Third, it is important to understand how college students approach tobacco control and the management of SHS exposure in their personal settings, such as their homes and cars.

Four overarching research questions guided our study as follows: 1. Less is known about the impact of having restrictions in vehicles.

Effects of smoking in public places

The Park Board and City Council which had to be involved for legal reasons both agreed that the enforcement would be handled by Park Rangers and police though there was hope that the bylaw would be self-enforcing through signage and social pressure. In fact, the recommendation to introduce the bylaw generated only limited discussion at the Park Board session at which it was debated and most of the discussion focused on health concerns. Table I. The independently coded transcripts were compared, and consensus for coding was reached. Results Survey research Table I provides survey participant characteristics as well as bivariate analyses comparing 2-year college and university students and males and females. Among smokers, support for these policies is related to greater intent to quit and lower cigarette consumption [ 14 ]. Reasons for opposition included: concerns over infringement on the rights of smokers, the potential for stigma, and issues with enforcement and compliance. Data analysis Qualitative data were analyzed according to the principles outlined in Morgan and Krueger [ 45 ]. Our research suggests, however, that enforcement and compliance remain concerns and warrant further study. Hence, we considered such equity issues using Mahoney et al. They then refined the definition of primary i. For each group, approximately 30 participants were invited to participate via telephone and e-mail. Other research has corroborated these findings [ 18 ].

Age-standardized Statistics Canada data for those with Aboriginal status in British Columbia for to estimated

Rated 7/10 based on 24 review