ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2026
Using aggregated ethnicity categories masks inequalities in smoking prevalence in England.
Article in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ethnic and Regional Disparities in Self-Reported Smoking Cessation Success: A Cross-Sectional Analysis of Local Authority-Level Data in England.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Using aggregated ethnicity categories masks inequalities in smoking prevalence in England.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsSmoking prevalence in England is usually reported using aggregated ethnicity categories, which may obscure important differences. This study aimed to: [1] estimate smoking prevalence in England for six aggregated categories; [2] examine differences between the 18 detailed constituent groups within these categories; and [3] assess whether patterns varied by gender. DESIGN/
settingData were collected between 2013 and 2025 in a series of monthly cross-sectional surveys of representative samples of the adult population in England.
participants229 979 adults aged 18 +. MEASUREMENTS: Weighted smoking prevalence was estimated for each of the 18 detailed and the six aggregated Office for National Statistics ethnicity categories. Logistic regression, adjusted for age, gender, socioeconomic status, region, survey year and survey mode examined the association between ethnicity categories and current smoking. Analyses were repeated including interactions for ethnicity by gender.
findingsSmoking prevalence in England differed substantially by ethnicity. Aggregated estimates were: Asian 12.1%, Black 11.1%, Mixed or Multiple 23.9%, White 18.0%, Arab 21.8%, and Other ethnicities 18.4%; however, these aggregates obscured important variation between detailed constituent groups. Among people from Asian ethnic groups, smoking prevalence was higher for people who were Pakistani (13.5%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 1.22 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.07-1.39]), Bangladeshi (15.9%; AOR = 1.44 [1.25-1.71]), Chinese (11.1%; AOR = 1.25 [0.99-1.57]), and Other Asian (12.6%; AOR = 1.29 [1.07-1.55]) adults compared with people who were Indian (9.3%; reference). Among people from Black ethnic groups, smoking prevalence was higher for Black Caribbean (17.2%; AOR = 3.34, [2.87-3.89]) and Other Black (17.2%; AOR = 2.92 [2.32-3.69]) adults compared with Black African adults (7.3%; reference). Among people from Mixed or Multiple ethnicity groups, smoking prevalence was lower for White and Black African (20.5%; AOR = 0.64 [0.50-0.81]), White and Asian (20.7%; AOR = 0.70 [0.57-0.87]), and Other Mixed or Multiple ethnicity (23.4%; AOR = 0.86 [0.70-1.06]) adults compared with White and Black Caribbean adults (29.1%; reference). Among people from White ethnic groups, smoking prevalence was higher for White Irish (19.9%; AOR = 1.32 [1.18-1.48]), White Gypsy/Traveller (39.1%; AOR = 1.99 [1.43-2.76]), and Other White (25.2%; AOR = 1.19 [1.13-1.25]) adults compared with White British adults (17.5%; reference). There was little difference in interpretation between fully adjusted models and those adjusted for just survey year and survey mode.
conclusionsSmoking rates differ greatly among ethnic groups in England that are often aggregated together in research and national statistics. Such aggregation hides important inequalities, including very high smoking prevalence in certain communities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.