Explore the vast range of titles available.

This research is the first nationally representative study to examine the relationship between actual state-level tobacco control spending in each of the 5 CDC's Best Practices for Comprehensive Tobacco Control Program categories and cigarette sales. We employed several alternative two-way fixed-effects regression techniques to estimate the determinants of cigarette sales in the United States for the years 2008-2012. State spending on tobacco control was found to have a negative and significant impact on cigarette sales in all models that were estimated. Spending in the areas of cessation interventions, health communication interventions, and state and community interventions were found to have a negative impact on cigarette sales in all models that were estimated, whereas spending in the areas of surveillance and evaluation, and administration and management were found to have negative effects on cigarette sales in only some models. Our models predict that states that spend up to seven times their current levels could still see significant reductions in cigarette sales. The findings from this research could help inform further investments in state tobacco control programs.

Functioning program infrastructure is necessary for achieving public health outcomes. It is what supports program capacity, implementation, and sustainability. The public health program infrastructure model presented in this article is grounded in data from a broader evaluation of 18 state tobacco control programs and previous work. The newly developed Component Model of Infrastructure (CMI) addresses the limitations of a previous model and contains 5 core components (multilevel leadership, managed resources, engaged data, responsive plans and planning, networked partnerships) and 3 supporting components (strategic understanding, operations, contextual influences). The CMI is a practical, implementation-focused model applicable across public health programs, enabling linkages to capacity, sustainability, and outcome measurement.

What is already known on this topic? Quitting smoking is beneficial to health at any age, and cigarette smokers who quit before age 35 years have mortality rates similar to those of persons who never smoked. What is added by this report?During 2001–2010, the proportion of adult cigarette smokers who had made a quit attempt in the past year increased significantly in 29 states and the U.S. Virgin Islands. During 2011–2013, the proportion who had made a quit attempt increased in Hawaii and Puerto Rico and decreased in New Mexico. In 2013, the proportion who had made a quit attempt ranged from 56.2% (Kentucky) to 76.4% (Puerto Rico and Guam) with a median of 65.9%, and was generally lower in older age groups. What are the implications for public health practice? Continued implementation of effective evidence-based public health interventions can reduce the health and costs impacts of smoking-related disease and death and accelerate progress toward meeting the Healthy People 2020 target to increase to ≥80% the proportion of U.S. adult cigarette smokers who made a quit attempt in the past year. These interventions include increasing the price of tobacco products, implementing comprehensive smoke-free laws, conducting educational mass media campaigns, and providing insurance coverage for all effective cessation treatments as well as access to quitlines.

Objectives: Monitoring awareness of a public education campaign can help to better understand the extent of sustained population-level exposure to the campaign. We examined unaided awareness (awareness that does not include a visual image to remind the respondent of the campaign or advertisement) and correlates of unaided awareness of “The Real Cost,” a national youth tobacco education campaign developed by the US Food and Drug Administration and implemented in 2014. Methods: This secondary analysis examined unaided campaign awareness by using data from the 2017 National Youth Tobacco Survey, a nationally representative school-based sample of young persons aged 9-19 years (n = 17 269) surveyed approximately 3 years after campaign launch. We compared unaided campaign awareness among various cigarette user groups (experimenters, susceptible nonsmokers, current or former smokers, and nonsusceptible nonsmokers). We examined associations between unaided campaign awareness and demographic and tobacco-related correlates, overall and by cigarette user group. Results: Three years after “The Real Cost” campaign was launched, most middle and high school students (58.5%) still reported unaided campaign awareness. Of 17 269 middle and high school students in the sample, 62.0% of susceptible nonsmokers and 64.5% of experimenters reported unaided campaign awareness. Among susceptible nonsmokers, unaided campaign awareness differed by age and race/ethnicity and was higher among students with greater tobacco-related harm perceptions (vs lower harm perceptions) and exposure to pro-tobacco marketing (vs no exposure). Conclusions: Future surveillance and research could examine awareness of “The Real Cost” campaign and effects of the campaign on young persons’ knowledge, attitudes, and beliefs to further assess the public health impact of tobacco prevention campaigns.

IntroductionOn 1 January 2016, Hawaii raised the minimum legal age for tobacco access from 18 to 21 years (‘Tobacco 21 (T21)’) statewide, with no special population exemptions. We assessed the impact of Hawaii’s T21 policy on sales of cigarettes and large cigars/cigarillos in civilian food stores, including menthol/flavoured product sales share.MethodsCigarette and large cigar/cigarillo sales and menthol/flavoured sales share were assessed in Hawaii, California (implemented T21 in June 2016 with a military exemption), and the US mainland using the only Nielsen data consistently available for each geographical area. Approximate monthly sales data from large-scale food stores with sales greater than US$2 million/year covered June 2012 to February 2017. Segmented regression analyses estimated changes in sales from prepolicy to postpolicy implementation periods.ResultsFollowing T21 in Hawaii, average monthly cigarette unit sales dropped significantly (−4.4%, p<0.01) coupled with a significant decrease in menthol market share (−0.8, p<0.01). This combination of effects was not observed in comparison areas. Unit sales of large cigars/cigarillos decreased significantly in each region following T21 implementation. T21 policies in Hawaii and California showed no association with flavoured/menthol cigar sales share, but there was a significant increase in flavoured/menthol cigar sales share in the USA (7.1%, p<0.01) relative to Hawaii’s implementation date, suggesting T21 may have attenuated an otherwise upward trend.ConclusionsAs part of a comprehensive approach to prevent or delay tobacco use initiation, T21 laws may help to reduce sales of cigarette and large cigar products most preferred by US youth and young adults.

This article describes the Environmental Assessment Instrument (EAI), a tool designed to help public health professionals analyze and then engage the environment in which programs operate. The prevailing environment is an important force that must be considered in an integrated systems approach when implementing programs and policies. The Division of Oral Health of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed the EAI to facilitate the ability of a state oral health program to understand their environment and the impact it has on the achievement of performance objectives. EAI results are plotted on a four-quadrant grid that depicts four types of change—stagnant, disruptive, continuous, and sporadic. General strategies are suggested based on these categories of change. By assessing environmental influences, program and policy planners can determine salient leverage points within their environment, identify strategies to address barriers to success, and build on supportive features in the environment.

Systemic infrastructure is key to public health achievements. Individual public health program infrastructure feeds into this larger system. Although program infrastructure is rarely defined, it needs to be operationalized for effective implementation and evaluation. The Ecological Model of Infrastructure (EMI) is one approach to defining program infrastructure. The EMI consists of 5 core (Leadership, Partnerships, State Plans, Engaged Data, and Managed Resources) and 2 supporting (Strategic Understanding and Tactical Action) elements that are enveloped in a program’s context. We conducted a literature search across public health programs to determine support for the EMI. Four of the core elements were consistently addressed, and the other EMI elements were intermittently addressed. The EMI provides an initial and partial model for understanding program infrastructure, but additional work is needed to identify evidence-based indicators of infrastructure elements that can be used to measure success and link infrastructure to public health outcomes, capacity, and sustainability.

Multiunit housing residents are at risk of secondhand smoke exposure from adjoining units and common areas. We developed this case study to document state-level strategies undertaken to address this risk. We explored program documents to identify facilitators, barriers, and outcomes. Three states (Montana, Michigan, and Nebraska) provided detailed information on multiunit housing efforts in the study time frame. We conducted a qualitative analysis using inductive coding to develop themes. Several facilitators relating to existing infrastructure included traditional and nontraditional partnerships, leadership and champions, collecting and using data, efficient use of resources, and strategic plans. We also report external catalysts, barriers, and outcomes. Significant state leadership and effort were required to provide local-level technical assistance to engage traditional and nontraditional partners. Information needs were identified and varied by stakeholder type (i.e., health vs. housing). States recommend starting with public housing authorities, so they can become resources for affordable and subsidized housing. These lessons and resources can be used to inform smoke-free multiunit housing initiatives in other states and localities.

A program's infrastructure is often cited as critical to public health success. The Component Model of Infrastructure (CMI) identifies evaluation as essential under the core component of engaged data. An evaluation plan is a written document that describes how to monitor and evaluate a program, as well as how to use evaluation results for program improvement and decision making. The evaluation plan clarifies how to describe what the program did, how it worked, and why outcomes matter. We use the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) \"Framework for Program Evaluation in Public Health\" as a guide for developing an evaluation plan. Just as using a roadmap facilitates progress on a long journey, a well-written evaluation plan can clarify the direction your evaluation takes and facilitate achievement of the evaluation's objectives.

During January 1, 2020-August 10, 2020, an estimated 5 million cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) were reported in the United States.* Published state and national data indicate that persons of color might be more likely to become infected with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, experience more severe COVID-19-associated illness, including that requiring hospitalization, and have higher risk for death from COVID-19 (1-5). CDC examined county-level disparities in COVID-19 cases among underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in counties identified as hotspots, which are defined using algorithmic thresholds related to the number of new cases and the changes in incidence. Disparities were defined as difference of ≥5% between the proportion of cases and the proportion of the population or a ratio ≥1.5 for the proportion of cases to the proportion of the population for underrepresented racial/ethnic groups in each county. During June 5-18, 205 counties in 33 states were identified as hotspots; among these counties, race was reported for ≥50% of cumulative cases in 79 (38.5%) counties in 22 states; 96.2% of these counties had disparities in COVID-19 cases in one or more underrepresented racial/ethnic groups. Hispanic/Latino (Hispanic) persons were the largest group by population size (3.5 million persons) living in hotspot counties where a disproportionate number of cases among that group was identified, followed by black/African American (black) persons (2 million), American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) persons (61,000), Asian persons (36,000), and Native Hawaiian/other Pacific Islander (NHPI) persons (31,000). Examining county-level data disaggregated by race/ethnicity can help identify health disparities in COVID-19 cases and inform strategies for preventing and slowing SARS-CoV-2 transmission. More complete race/ethnicity data are needed to fully inform public health decision-making. Addressing the pandemic's disproportionate incidence of COVID-19 in communities of color can reduce the community-wide impact of COVID-19 and improve health outcomes.