4.7 Article

Smoking prevalence and smoking attributable mortality in Italy, 2010

Journal

PREVENTIVE MEDICINE
Volume 52, Issue 6, Pages 434-438

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.03.011

Keywords

Epidemiology; Italy; Population survey; Tobacco smoking; Smoking attributable mortality

Funding

  1. University of Barcelona
  2. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [RD06/0020/0089]
  3. Government of Spain and the Ministry of Universities and Research [2009SGR192]
  4. Government of Catalonia
  5. European Commission [235319]
  6. Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro Funding Source: Custom

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective. To provide updated information on smoking prevalence and attributable mortality in Italy. Method. A representative survey on smoking was conducted in 2010 on a sample of 3020 Italian adults (1453 men and 1567 women). We used SAMMEC software to update smoking attributable mortality in Italy. Results. In 2010, 21.7% of Italians (23.9% of men and 19.7% of women) described themselves as current smokers. Smoking prevalence was higher in men than in women in all age groups, except for the middle-aged population (45-64 years; 25.6% in men and 25.9% in women). Age-standardized smoking prevalence was higher in men than in women among less educated subjects and in southern Italy. No substantial difference was observed either in educated subjects or in northern and central Italy. Overall, 71,445 deaths in Italy (52,707 men and 18,738 women, 12.5% of total mortality) are attributable to smoking. Conclusion. The overall smoking prevalence of 21.7% in 2010 is the lowest registered over the last 50 years. Since 1998, smoking related deaths declined by almost 15%. Given that Italy has now reached the final stage of the tobacco epidemic, anti-smoking strategies should focus on support for smoking cessation. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available