The Journal of rural health : official journal of the American Rural Health Association and the National Rural Health Care Association · 2026
Adult tobacco product use patterns across the urban-rural continuum: The longitudinal Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, 2016-2023.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhang Jing, Rose Shyanika W, Hahn Ellen J, Roberts Megan E, Fennell Bethany Shorey, Ozga Jenny E, Himelhoch Seth, Feizy Saber, Christian W Jay, Wiggins Amanda Thaxton, Abadi Melissa, Mattingly Delvon T, Rayens Mary Kay
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To determine the association between adult tobacco/nicotine product use over time and residence location (urban, suburban, town, rural), controlling for demographics.
METHODS: Data from Waves 4-7 (2016-2023) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study (N = 18,590 adults) were analyzed using survey-weighted logistic regression to evaluate location and time differences in likelihoods of current, daily, and established use of combustible tobacco, electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), smokeless products, and poly use (≥2 products).
FINDINGS: Compared to those residing in urban locations, suburban residents were less likely to report current (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.88), daily (aOR = 0.73), and established combustible products use (aOR = 0.77); town residents were more likely to use these products currently (aOR = 1.20) and daily (aOR = 1.42), and rural residents were more likely to use daily (aOR = 1.25) and report established use (aOR = 1.33). Rural residents had a lower likelihood of current ENDS use (aOR = 0.90), compared with those in urban locations. Compared with urban residents, current smokeless products use was more likely among rural residents (aOR = 1.63) and less likely among those in suburban locations (aOR = 0.74). Participants living in suburban (vs. urban) locations were less likely to use ≥2 products currently (aOR = 0.89) or daily (aOR = 0.79), while rural residents were more likely to engage in daily poly use (aOR = 1.39). Time was a significant factor in all models, with fluctuating patterns across waves.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight nuanced geographic differences in tobacco/nicotine product use patterns beyond simple urban-rural comparisons, informing efforts to eliminate tobacco/nicotine use disparities.
METHODS: Data from Waves 4-7 (2016-2023) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study (N = 18,590 adults) were analyzed using survey-weighted logistic regression to evaluate location and time differences in likelihoods of current, daily, and established use of combustible tobacco, electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), smokeless products, and poly use (≥2 products).
FINDINGS: Compared to those residing in urban locations, suburban residents were less likely to report current (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.88), daily (aOR = 0.73), and established combustible products use (aOR = 0.77); town residents were more likely to use these products currently (aOR = 1.20) and daily (aOR = 1.42), and rural residents were more likely to use daily (aOR = 1.25) and report established use (aOR = 1.33). Rural residents had a lower likelihood of current ENDS use (aOR = 0.90), compared with those in urban locations. Compared with urban residents, current smokeless products use was more likely among rural residents (aOR = 1.63) and less likely among those in suburban locations (aOR = 0.74). Participants living in suburban (vs. urban) locations were less likely to use ≥2 products currently (aOR = 0.89) or daily (aOR = 0.79), while rural residents were more likely to engage in daily poly use (aOR = 1.39). Time was a significant factor in all models, with fluctuating patterns across waves.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings highlight nuanced geographic differences in tobacco/nicotine product use patterns beyond simple urban-rural comparisons, informing efforts to eliminate tobacco/nicotine use disparities.