Evidence Hub

Prevalence of passive smoking in the community population aged 15 years and older in China: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Jing Zeng, Shan-Shan Yang, Lei Wu, Jian-hua Wang, Yi-Yan Wang, Miao Liu, Di Zhang, B. Jiang et al.

BMJ Open, 2016

30 citations

Abstract

Objectives To estimate the prevalence and distribution of passive smoking in the community population aged 15 years and older in China. Design A systematic review and meta-analysis of cross-sectional studies reporting the prevalence of passive smoking in China and a series of subgroup, trend and sensitivity analyses were conducted in this study. Data source The systematic review and meta-analysis, which included 46 studies with 381 580 non-smokers, estimated the prevalence and distribution of passive smoking in China. All studies were published between 1997 and 2015. Results The pooled prevalence of passive smoking was 48.7% (95% CI 44.8% to 52.5%) and was relatively stable from 1995 to 2013. The prevalence in the subgroups of gender, area, age and time varied from 35.1% (95% CI 31.8% to 38.3%) in the elderly (≥60 years) to 48.6% (95% CI 42.9% to 54.2%) in urban areas. The prevalence was lower in the elderly (≥60 years) than in those between 15 and 59 years of age (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.44 to 1.81). The difference between females and males in urban and rural areas was not statistically significant (OR: 1.27, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.74 and OR: 1.14, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.58, respectively). In addition, a significantly increasing trend was found among males from 2002 to 2010. Heterogeneity was high in all pooled estimates (I2>98%, p<0.001). Conclusions The high and stable prevalence of passive smoking in China is raising increasing national concern regarding specific research and tobacco…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free