2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2008.06.065
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cardiovascular Effect of Bans on Smoking in Public Places

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
25
0
1

Year Published

2010
2010
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

1
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
0
25
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…When compared with non-smokers, smokers are twice as likely to experience acute myocardial infarction [1], which contributes to the increase in mortality seen in smokers [2]. The molecular mechanisms by which smoking promotes atherosclerosis have not been fully delineated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…When compared with non-smokers, smokers are twice as likely to experience acute myocardial infarction [1], which contributes to the increase in mortality seen in smokers [2]. The molecular mechanisms by which smoking promotes atherosclerosis have not been fully delineated.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, it has been observed that majority of participants in both the groups [208 (83.9); 304 (77.6)] smoked or chewed tobacco at workplaces. Verdonk-Kleinjan et al 37 and Meyers et al 38 reported a similar prevalence and suggested that nosmoking bans in public places and workplaces are significantly associated with increased use of tobacco, which was linked to increase in acute myocardial infarction incidence. Disease incidence can be reduced if tobacco ban policy is implemented over several years.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 85%
“…A number of the studies lacked such data (eg, Helena, Montana; Monroe County, Indiana; and Pueblo, Colorado). [1][2][3] There have been a relatively large number of individual studies related to exposure to secondhand smoke. Evaluations of the success of implementation of statewide clean indoor air acts have often included telephone and in-person interviews with management or employees as to reported secondhand smoke exposures, personal observations of smoking prevalence, measurements of indoor air nicotine concentrations, and measurements of salivary, urinary, or serum cotinine levels.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%