Background Sexual minority (SM) (gay, lesbian and bisexual) adults are at higher risk of smoking compared with heterosexual individuals, yet little is known about how the tobacco control policy landscape interacts with sexual orientation smoking disparities.
Methods We conducted a descriptive analysis to explore differential exposure to smoke-free laws and televised anti-tobacco media using two sources of national data from the United States: Census data on same-sex couple households/all households and data on SM adults/all adults from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). We combined this information with variables representing the proportion of individuals in each county covered by smoke-free laws (2013–2017), and average county-level exposure to televised anti-tobacco media campaigns (2013–2015). We compared average coverage levels for SM populations to average coverage levels for the broader US population.
Results Between 2013 and 2017, same-sex couple households/SM adults lived in counties with higher levels of smoke-free law coverage compared with all US households/adults for workplaces (Census: 71.3% vs 68.0%; NHIS: 70.7% vs 67.9%) and hospitality venues (Census: 82.3% vs 77.0%; NHIS: 80.5% vs 77.2%). There were no consistent differences in exposures to anti-tobacco media campaigns across datasets.
Conclusions SM adults may be more likely to live in areas with smoke-free laws, compared with the general population. Findings point to the need to examine other potential drivers of smoking in SM populations.
- public policy
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors NLF and ART conceived and supervised the study. ART completed the analysis and drafted and revised the article. KEG, JT, SLE, MRE and NLF provided feedback on the analysis and contributed to the writing. All authors approved the final version of the paper.
Funding Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R37CA214787. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of NIH.
Disclaimer The findings and conclusions in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Research Data Center, the National Center for Health Statistics or the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Competing interests None declared.
Patient consent for publication Not required.
Ethics approval Data collection for NHIS was approved by the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) Research Ethics Review Board (ERB). Analysis of deidentified data from NHIS is exempt from the federal regulations for the protection of human research participants. Analysis of restricted NHIS data through the NCHS RDC is also approved by the NCHS ERB.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.