Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Disaggregating Asian American and Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander (AANHOPI) Adult Tobacco Use: Findings from Wave 1 of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, 2013-2014.

INTRODUCTION: Tobacco studies often combine data for Asian American and Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander (AANHOPI) subgroups, masking subgroup differences. This study describes tobacco use (ever use and past 30-day use) among some disaggregated AANHOPI subgroups.

METHODS: Data are from Wave 1 of the 2013-2014 Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study, a nationally representative, longitudinal cohort study of civilian non-institutionalized adults and youth in the USA. The dataset contains a sample of 32,320 adults, of which 1623 identified as being of AANHOPI origin. Asian Americans further identified as being Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, or other Asian. Those who identified as Native Hawaiian, Guamanian or Chamarro, Samoan, and Other Pacific Islander were combined into an NHOPI group. Tobacco measures included ever and past 30-day use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes, cigars (traditional cigar, cigarillos, filtered cigar), hookah, and smokeless tobacco including snus pouches, and pipe tobacco. Unadjusted and adjusted estimates for tobacco use are reported by AANHOPI membership and sex.

RESULTS: In general, Asian Indians and Chinese had the lowest and NHOPI had the highest tobacco use prevalence compared to other AANHOPI subgroups. Males generally had higher prevalence compared to females. Prevalence varied by AANHOPI membership and tobacco product. Adjusted prevalence estimates were higher compared to unadjusted estimates for many subgroups, attenuating some unadjusted differences found between AANHOPI subgroups.

DISCUSSION: Tobacco use varies by AANHOPI subgroup and product type. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses can be conducted as tobacco use differences in AANHOPI subgroups may be attributed to socio-economic status differences. Treating these distinct subgroups as a monolithic group may contribute to reliance on tobacco prevention and control strategies that may have limited impact on specific subgroups.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app