2012
DOI: 10.1093/ntr/nts074
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Factors Influencing Exposure to Secondhand Smoke in Preschool Children Living With Smoking Mothers

Abstract: Preschool children's exposure to SHS in homes where the mother smokes is considerable. Interventions and policy development to increase parental awareness of the health effects of SHS and provide parents with the confidence to implement smoke-free households are required to reduce the SHS exposure of preschool age children.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
40
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 33 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
1
40
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The average PM 2.5 concentrations in the homes of smoking participants was 33.3 μg/m 3 which is broadly similar to the value (40.7 μg/m 3 ) measured at baseline in the REFRESH project looking at smoking mothers with children under 5 years of age. 13 It is, however, markedly lower than that measured (187 μg/m 3 ) in a sample of 11 smoking homes recruited through the IAPAH (Indoor Air Pollution and Health) study within the same geographical area. 18 IAPAH sought to recruit households with any single type of open household combustion (wood, coal, peat, gas or smoking), and was not restricted to households containing children as REFRESH and this study were.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The average PM 2.5 concentrations in the homes of smoking participants was 33.3 μg/m 3 which is broadly similar to the value (40.7 μg/m 3 ) measured at baseline in the REFRESH project looking at smoking mothers with children under 5 years of age. 13 It is, however, markedly lower than that measured (187 μg/m 3 ) in a sample of 11 smoking homes recruited through the IAPAH (Indoor Air Pollution and Health) study within the same geographical area. 18 IAPAH sought to recruit households with any single type of open household combustion (wood, coal, peat, gas or smoking), and was not restricted to households containing children as REFRESH and this study were.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 81%
“…11 The REFRESH study used the Sidepak AM510 Personal Aerosol Monitors (TSI, Minnesota, USA) to measure and log household PM 2.5 concentrations. 13 The Sidepak device is primarily designed to measure occupational exposures to fine dust and is costly (>£2500), noisy and requires some degree of training to operate: factors that make their use in home-based interventions difficult.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Details of two of these projects (Indoor Air Pollution and Health—IAPAH; and Reducing Families’ Exposure to Second-hand Smoke in the Home—REFRESH) have previously been published 13 15 16. IAPAH was carried out from October 2009 to March 2010, while REFRESH data were acquired from July 2010 to March 2011.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The overall 24 h PM 2.5 average in smoking homes was then corrected to reflect the generally higher PM levels measured as a result of smoking activity during the day as opposed to night-time. This weighting was derived from time-course analysis of the REFRESH data 15. From our combined data set, median day-time levels were 35 μg/m 3 , a SD of 119 μg/m 3 with lower and upper bounds of 5 and 1000 μg/m 3 ; night-time median values were 23 μg/m 3 , SD 78 μg/m 3 with bounds of 5 and 1000 μg/m 3 .…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This article considers the perceived relationship of SHSE to other child protection priorities, and how further action to reduce children's SHSE can be constrained by limited financial resources and shifting public health priorities. This article is viewed through the lens of the Reducing Families' Exposure to Secondhand Smoke (REFRESH) project, which was a feasibility study that evaluated a smoke-free home intervention delivered in the home to mothers who smoked and had a child under 6 years old 21–23. This article draws on data from phase III of the study, which explored how policy makers and public health practitioners responded to the positive evidence from REFRESH on the feasibility of a smoke-free home intervention, the risks of SHSE to children in general and the implications of the findings for their policy and practice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%