Impact of Total Indoor Smoking Ban on Cardiovascular Disease Hospitalizations and Mortality: The Case of Chile
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The harmful effects of first and secondhand smoking are well-established. Smoke-free laws aim at protecting nonsmokers. This study aimed to assess the impact of the 2013 total ban on indoor smoking in Chile on hospitalizations and deaths of major cardiovascular events. AIMS AND METHODS: The logarithm of the monthly hospitalization and death rates, standardized by age for every 100 000 inhabitants, were estimated for ischemic heart disease, acute myocardial infarction, strokes, and a composite outcome of ischemic heart diseases (which includes acute myocardial infarction) and strokes. In addition, interrupted time series with synthetic control groups were used to assess changes in levels and trends after the intervention. RESULTS: The total ban on indoor smoking caused significant reductions in death rates for the three diseases studied for age groups above 20 years old. In addition, there were substantial decreases in the post-intervention hospitalization rates for ischemic heart disease: for the 20-44 age group, the decrease was 8.7% compared to the pre-intervention period (p < .01). In comparison, such a reduction was 4% (p < .01) for the ≥65 age group. For acute myocardial infarction, the decrease was 11.5% (p < .01) for the 20-44 age group, while for stroke, it was a 1.2% (p < .01) decrease for the total population. It is estimated that the smoking ban averted 15.6% of the deaths compared with the synthetic control groups. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of total smoke-free environments in Chile contributed to the reduction of mortality for main cardiovascular diseases. This study provides additional evidence of causality linking the policy to health outcomes. IMPLICATIONS: The total indoor smoking ban significantly affected age-standardized hospitalization and deaths. The number of deaths averted by this policy is estimated at approximately 4758 and 5256 for IHD and stroke, respectively, during the 2013-2017 period (15.6% fewer deaths than predicted by the synthetic control groups). The study contributes to the body of evidence that supports total indoor smoking bans.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".