Public support for smoke-free policies in outdoor areas and (semi-) private places: a systematic review and meta-analysis 89 4 Author Places covered by smoke-free policy Measurements and comparison Findings Support (percentage, unless otherwise specified) Kennedy (2015) Multi-unit housing 1 pre- and 2 post- measurements Among smokers, support for smokefree multi-unit housing significantly decreased directly after implementation, but increased again 2 years later. Among non-smokers, support for smokefree multi-unit housing did not significantly change at both timepoints. Smokers: Pre: 26.0% After 1 year: 22.9% After 3 years: 29.4% Non-smokers: Pre: 86.7% After 1 year: 88.5% After 3 years: 88.2% Lechner (2012) University campus 1 pre- and 3 postmeasurements Support for smokefree university campuses significantly increased following their introduction. Support was measured on a score 1 to 7, where higher is more favourable towards smoke-free environment. Mean (SD) Pre: 4.57 (2.43) After 1 year: 5.33 (2.22) After 2 years: 5.47 (2.04) After 3 years: 5.77 (1.93) Riad-Allen (2017) Hospital campus 1 pre- and 2 postmeasurements Support for hospital campuses did not significantly change following their introduction. Support was measured on a score 1 to 7, where higher is more favourable towards smoke-free environment. Mean (SD) Pre: 3.89 (1.31) After 6 months: 3.75 (1.16) After 1 year: 3.87 (1.34) Sweeting (2021) Prison 2 pre- and 1 post measurement Support for smokefree prisons did not significantly change over time, for prisoners as well as staff. Prisoners: Hypothetical: 23.5% Pre: 25.0% Post: 27.3% Staff: Hypothetical: 79.0% Pre: 69.9% Post: 83.7% Table 3: Continued
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw