Tobacco smoking in three “left behind” subgroups: indigenous, the rainbow community and people with mental health conditions

IF 0.9 Q3 Psychology Drugs and Alcohol Today Pub Date : 2020-07-01 DOI:10.1108/dat-02-2020-0004
M. Glover, P. Patwardhan, K. Selket
{"title":"Tobacco smoking in three “left behind” subgroups: indigenous, the rainbow community and people with mental health conditions","authors":"M. Glover, P. Patwardhan, K. Selket","doi":"10.1108/dat-02-2020-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThis paper aims to investigate the extent to which three subgroups – people with mental health conditions, people belonging to sexual minority and gender groups and Indigenous peoples – have been “left behind” by countries implementing the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA general review of electronic bibliographical databases to provide an overview of smoking prevalence among the three groups and interventions designed specifically to reduce their smoking rates.\n\n\nFindings\nAlthough explanations and specific rates differ, two trends are consistent across all three groups. First, information reported in the past two decades suggests that smoking prevalence is disproportionately high among people with mental health conditions, and in the rainbow and indigenous communities. Second, most cessation programmes are targeted at majority politically dominant groups, missing opportunities to reduce smoking rates in these minority communities.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThere is a general dearth of data preventing detailed analysis. Better data collection efforts are required. Trials to identify effective smoking reduction interventions for marginalised groups are needed.\n\n\nSocial implications\nIt is socially unjust that these groups are being systematically ignored by tobacco control initiatives. A failure to equitably reduce tobacco harms among all groups across society has contributed to the perceived concentration of smoking in some subgroups. The increasing stigmatisation of people who smoke then adds a marginality, compounding the negative effects associated with belonging to a marginalised group. Ongoing marginalisation of these groups is an important determinant of smoking.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nCross-case analysis of neglected subgroups with disproportionately high smoking rates suggests social marginalisation is a shared and important determinant of smoking prevalence.\n","PeriodicalId":44780,"journal":{"name":"Drugs and Alcohol Today","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2020-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/dat-02-2020-0004","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drugs and Alcohol Today","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/dat-02-2020-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Purpose This paper aims to investigate the extent to which three subgroups – people with mental health conditions, people belonging to sexual minority and gender groups and Indigenous peoples – have been “left behind” by countries implementing the World Health Organization’s Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Design/methodology/approach A general review of electronic bibliographical databases to provide an overview of smoking prevalence among the three groups and interventions designed specifically to reduce their smoking rates. Findings Although explanations and specific rates differ, two trends are consistent across all three groups. First, information reported in the past two decades suggests that smoking prevalence is disproportionately high among people with mental health conditions, and in the rainbow and indigenous communities. Second, most cessation programmes are targeted at majority politically dominant groups, missing opportunities to reduce smoking rates in these minority communities. Research limitations/implications There is a general dearth of data preventing detailed analysis. Better data collection efforts are required. Trials to identify effective smoking reduction interventions for marginalised groups are needed. Social implications It is socially unjust that these groups are being systematically ignored by tobacco control initiatives. A failure to equitably reduce tobacco harms among all groups across society has contributed to the perceived concentration of smoking in some subgroups. The increasing stigmatisation of people who smoke then adds a marginality, compounding the negative effects associated with belonging to a marginalised group. Ongoing marginalisation of these groups is an important determinant of smoking. Originality/value Cross-case analysis of neglected subgroups with disproportionately high smoking rates suggests social marginalisation is a shared and important determinant of smoking prevalence.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
3 .土著、彩虹社区和有精神健康问题的人这三个"落后"群体的吸烟情况
目的本文旨在调查三个亚组——有心理健康状况的人,属于性少数群体和性别群体的人以及土著人民——被执行世界卫生组织《烟草控制框架公约》的国家“甩在了后面”特别是为了降低他们的吸烟率。发现尽管解释和具体比率各不相同,但三组中有两种趋势是一致的。首先,过去二十年报告的信息表明,在有心理健康问题的人中,以及在彩虹和土著社区中,吸烟率高得不成比例。其次,大多数戒烟计划都针对政治上占多数的群体,错过了降低这些少数群体吸烟率的机会。研究局限性/含义普遍缺乏数据,无法进行详细分析。需要加强数据收集工作。需要进行试验,为边缘化群体确定有效的减少吸烟干预措施。这些群体被烟草控制倡议系统性地忽视,这在社会上是不公正的。未能公平减少社会各群体的烟草危害,导致人们认为吸烟集中在某些亚群体中。对吸烟者的污名化加剧了边缘化,加剧了与属于边缘化群体相关的负面影响。这些群体的持续边缘化是吸烟的一个重要决定因素。原创性/价值对吸烟率过高的被忽视亚组的交叉案例分析表明,社会边缘化是吸烟率的一个共同而重要的决定因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Drugs and Alcohol Today
Drugs and Alcohol Today SUBSTANCE ABUSE-
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
The misuse of drugs act – a user perspective More harm than good? Cannabis, harm and the misuse of drugs act Risk perception, health stressors and reduction in sharing cannabis products during the COVID-19 outbreak: a cross-sectional study From law to regulation: re-appraising the misuse of Drugs Act 1971 Fifty years of the UK Misuse of Drugs Act 1971: the legislative contexts
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1