title: Clean indoor air ordinance coverage in the Appalachian region of the United States.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  We sought to quantitatively examine the pattern of, and socioeconomic factors associated with, adoption of clean indoor air ordinances in Appalachia.
  
  
  METHODS
  We collected and reviewed clean indoor air ordinances in Appalachian communities in 6 states and rated the ordinances for completeness of coverage in workplaces, restaurants, and bars. Additionally, we computed a strength score to measure coverage in 7 locations. We fit mixed-effects models to determine whether the presence of a comprehensive ordinance and the ordinance strength were related to community socioeconomic disadvantage.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Of the 332 communities included in the analysis, fewer than 20% had adopted a comprehensive workplace, restaurant, or bar ordinance. Most ordinances were weak, achieving on average only 43% of the total possible points. Communities with a higher unemployment rate were less likely and those with a higher education level were more likely to have a strong ordinance.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The majority of residents in these communities are not protected from secondhand smoke. Efforts to pass strong statewide clean indoor air laws should take priority over local initiatives in these states.
authors.affiliation: The Ohio State University College of Public Health, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. aferketich@cph.osu.edu
authors.forename: Amy K
authors.initials: AK
authors.lastname: Ferketich
authors.forename: Alex
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Liber
authors.forename: Michael
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Pennell
authors.forename: Darren
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Nealy
authors.forename: Jana
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Hammer
authors.forename: Micah
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Berman
mesh_terms: D016902:Air Pollution, Indoor / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D001061:Appalachian Region; D004522:Educational Status; D006291:Health Policy / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D006801:Humans; D009111:Local Government; D014028:Tobacco Smoke Pollution / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D014478:Unemployment / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D017132:Workplace / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence
chemical_list: D014028:Tobacco Smoke Pollution
references.citation: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2002 Jun 21;51(24):527-9
references.pmid: 12088143
references.citation: J Public Health Manag Pract. 2004 Jul-Aug;10(4):338-53
references.pmid: 15235381
references.citation: Tob Control. 2002 Mar;11(1):26-34
references.pmid: 11891365
references.citation: Tob Control. 2005 Feb;14(1):43-8
references.pmid: 15735299
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2007 Nov;97(11):2035-9
references.pmid: 17901438
references.citation: Tob Control. 1999 Summer;8(2):137-40
references.pmid: 10478396
references.citation: Prev Med. 2007 Jul;45(1):3-8
references.pmid: 17482249
references.citation: Nicotine Tob Res. 2009 Sep;11(9):1114-21
references.pmid: 19654237
references.citation: Biometrics. 1997 Sep;53(3):983-97
references.pmid: 9333350
references.citation: Prev Chronic Dis. 2005 Jul;2(3):A08
references.pmid: 15963310
references.citation: BMJ. 2000 Aug 5;321(7257):333-7
references.pmid: 10926588
references.citation: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2009 Mar 13;58(9):221-6
references.pmid: 19282813
references.citation: Am J Public Health. 2004 Feb;94(2):286-92
references.pmid: 14759944
references.citation: South Med J. 2004 Jul;97(7):645-50
references.pmid: 15301121
references.citation: Nicotine Tob Res. 2009 Apr;11(4):381-6
references.pmid: 19346510
references.citation: Policy Polit Nurs Pract. 2005 Aug;6(3):211-20
references.pmid: 16443976
references.citation: N C Med J. 2006 May-Jun;67(3):175-9
references.pmid: 16846156