Tobacco Use and Secondhand Smoke Exposure: Community Education to Reduce Secondhand Smoke Exposure in the Home – Inactive

Inactive Community Guide Review

The reviews and findings listed on this page are inactive. Inactive reviews and findings are not scheduled for an update at this time, though they may be updated in the future. Findings become inactive when reviewed interventions are no longer commonly used, when other organizations begin systematically reviewing the interventions, or as a result of conflicting priorities within a topic area.

Summary of CPSTF Finding

The Community Preventive Services Task Force (CPSTF) finds insufficient evidence to assess the effectiveness of community education to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke in homes.


Community education to reduce exposure to secondhand smoke in the home includes all efforts to increase knowledge and to change attitudes about the health effects of exposure to secondhand smoke. Techniques include mass media messages, small media messages (including educational materials), and counseling provided outside of health care settings.

CPSTF Finding and Rationale Statement

Read the CPSTF finding.

About The Systematic Review

The CPSTF finding is based on evidence from a systematic review which identified only one study (search period 1980 – 2000).

The systematic review was conducted on behalf of the CPSTF by a team of specialists in systematic review methods, and in research, practice, and policy related to reducing tobacco use and secondhand smoke exposure.

Summary of Results

More details about study results are available in the published evidence review.

One study qualified for the review and it evaluated a randomized trial of home nurse visits to help families reduce infant exposure to secondhand smoke.

Summary of Economic Evidence

An economic review of this intervention was not conducted because CPSTF did not have enough information to determine if the intervention works.


Applicability of this intervention across different settings and populations was not assessed because CPSTF did not have enough information to determine if the intervention works.

Evidence Gaps

CPSTF identified several areas that have limited information. Additional research and evaluation could help answer the following questions and fill remaining gaps in the evidence base. (What are evidence gaps?)
  • How effective are educational methods in reducing secondhand smoke exposure in the home?
  • What are the relative contributions to reducing secondhand smoke exposure of (1) adherence to policies that ban or restrict smoking in the home, and (2) smoking cessation?
  • Do policies in the home that ban or restrict smoking reduce exposure to secondhand smoke? In adults? In children? Are households with children more likely to adopt policies that ban or restrict smoking in the home?
  • Are home smoking bans more effective than smoking restrictions?
  • What information or message is effective in prompting and maintaining practices in the home?
  • What channels are effective for dissemination of information to reduce secondhand smoke exposure in the home?

Study Characteristics

The single qualifying study evaluated a randomized trial of home nurse visits intended to help families reduce infant exposure to secondhand smoke.

Analytic Framework

Effectiveness Review

No content is available for this section.

When starting an effectiveness review, the systematic review team develops an analytic framework. The analytic framework illustrates how the intervention approach is thought to affect public health. It guides the search for evidence and may be used to summarize the evidence collected. The analytic framework often includes intermediate outcomes, potential effect modifiers, potential harms, and potential additional benefits.

Summary Evidence Table

Effectiveness Review

No content is available for this section.

Included Studies

The number of studies and publications do not always correspond (e.g., a publication may include several studies or one study may be explained in several publications).

Effectiveness Review

Greenberg RA, Strecher VJ, Bauman KE, et al. Evaluation of a home-based intervention program to reduce infant passive smoking and lower respiratory illness. J Behav Med 1994;17:273 90.

Search Strategies

Electronic searches for literature were conducted in Medline, EconLit, and the database of the Office on Smoking and Health (OSH). The OSH database, a focused database of tobacco prevention and control articles, was so complete that we did not conduct searches of additional electronic databases. We also reviewed the references listed in all retrieved articles and consulted with experts on the chapter development team. With very few exceptions (e.g., one final report to the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation), included studies were published in journals. To be included in the review, a study had to
  • Have a publication date of 1980 to May 2000
  • Address at least one area in our conceptual framework (ETS, initiation, cessation)
  • Be a primary study rather than, for example, a guideline or review
  • Take place in an industrialized country or countries
  • Be written in English
  • Meet the evidence review and the Community Guide chapter development team’s definition of the interventions
  • Provide information on one or more outcomes related to the analytic frameworks; and Compare a group of people who had been exposed to the intervention with a group of people who had not been exposed or who had been less exposed. (The comparisons could be concurrent or in the same group over a period of time.)

Our initial database searches were conducted in January 1998. A second database search was conducted in August 1999. Any study added after August 1999 was referred by members of the chapter development team or identified in the reference lists of retrieved articles.

Considerations for Implementation

CPSTF did not have enough evidence to determine whether the intervention is or is not effective. This does not mean that the intervention does not work, but rather that additional research is needed to determine whether or not the intervention is effective.


Evidence-Based Cancer Control Programs (EBCCP)

Find programs from the EBCCP website that align with this systematic review. (What is EBCCP?)