Tobacco Industry Efforts to Respond to Smoke-Free Policies in Multi-Unit Housing: An Evaluation of Tobacco Industry Documents
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This manuscript reports a study on tobacco industry response to smoke-free policies in Multi-Unit Housing (MUH). The material comes from tobacco industry documents in UCSF Tobacco Industry Documents Library.
There has been rather much published on tobacco industry documents (much from the San Francisco group) and on policy issues around smokefree areas and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). Thus there is not much new about tobacco industry tactics, but more specifically the issue around multi-unit housing is so far seldom touched. The general situation in the US in the Introduction chapter is interesting.
As the authors mention, this information is to great extent historical, since much of the activity took place during time until early 2000’s. The description of the later developments is, however, also interesting.
An outsider has to trust the methods. The possible limitations are well mentioned. The information on the funding of scientific research by CIAR in Table 1 is quite shocking and the information on deflection quite interesting. The point concerning the role of this topic on health inequalities is important.
The paper and the text is completely restricted to US situation. For readers outside the US this is certainly interesting, and especially the policy developments with HUD and PHAs. I wonder whether the authors have any information on related work outside the US? I would think that in many countries, especially in the big cities of low and middle income countries, the problem of ETS in multi-unit housing is much bigger. This could be discussed.
Author Response
Reviewer #1
- This manuscript reports a study on tobacco industry response to smoke-free policies in Multi-Unit Housing (MUH). The material comes from tobacco industry documents in UCSF Tobacco Industry Documents Library. There has been rather much published on tobacco industry documents (much from the San Francisco group) and on policy issues around smokefree areas and environmental tobacco smoke (ETS). Thus there is not much new about tobacco industry tactics, but more specifically the issue around multi-unit housing is so far seldom touched. The general situation in the US in the Introduction chapter is interesting.
Response: We thank the reviewer for these comments.
- As the authors mention, this information is to great extent historical, since much of the activity took place during time until early 2000’s. The description of the later developments is, however, also interesting.
Response: We have included one sentence to emphasize that the issue of tobacco use in multi-unit housing is still relevant today in the introduction.
Location: Page 2, Introduction, Lines 70-72
- An outsider has to trust the methods. The possible limitations are well mentioned. The information on the funding of scientific research by CIAR in Table 1 is quite shocking and the information on deflection quite interesting. The point concerning the role of this topic on health inequalities is important.
Response: We thank the reviewer for these comments.
- The paper and the text is completely restricted to US situation. For readers outside the US this is certainly interesting, and especially the policy developments with HUD and PHAs. I wonder whether the authors have any information on related work outside the US? I would think that in many countries, especially in the big cities of low- and middle-income countries, the problem of ETS in multi-unit housing is much bigger. This could be discussed.
Response: The work proposed in this study capitalizes on the momentum to introduce smoke-free policies in US multi-unit housing and the industry efforts to influence such policies. While the reviewer raises an important issue, exploring the industry efforts to influence smoke-free policies in multi-unit housing in countries outside of the US is beyond the scope of this work. However, we have included this as a potential future direction of this work.
Location: Page 7, Discussion, Line 325-327
Reviewer 2 Report
The topic is very interesting and under the scope of the journal. The tobacco infection is very interesting and hot topic. I have following concerns that should be modified before final publication.
- The introduction is not so motivated such as research gap and research contribution.
- The major concern is previous studies/literature review. Section 2 is too short please add more related literature. The current stuff is not enough to support this study.
- Practical and theoretical implications are missing. Please add these two sections after discussion part.
- Limitation and future direction section is also missing.
- Please add new references throughout the manuscript.
- Please add journal paper references throughout the manuscript.
Good Luck
Author Response
Reviewer #2:
- The topic is very interesting and under the scope of the journal. The tobacco infection is very interesting and hot topic.
Response: We thank the reviewer for their comment.
- The introduction is not so motivated such as research gap and research contribution.
Response: We have re-written the introduction to highlight the research gap and the potential contribution of this research.
Location: Page 2-3, Introduction, Lines 85-112
- The major concern is previous studies/literature review. Section 2 is too short please add more related literature. The current stuff is not enough to support this study.
Response: We have added more information to the introduction to provide context to this study.
Location: Page 2-3, Introduction, Lines 85-112
- Practical and theoretical implications are missing. Please add these two sections after discussion part.
Response: We have added practical and theoretical implications in the discussion.
Location: Page 7, Discussion, Lines 319-325
- Limitation and future direction section is also missing
Response: We have added to our limitations sections on Page 8, and we have added .implications and future directions.
Location: Page 8, Limitations, Lines 328-338; Future directions and implications; Page 7, Lines 321-327.
- Please add new references throughout the manuscript.’
Response: We have added references in the introduction that describes new context to the study, in methods to describe the Truth Tobacco Industry Documents, in the results section in the Table to describe relevant publications from the CIAR report, and in the discussion.
Location: Page 3, Methods, citations for Truth Tobacco Industry Documents, Lines 130;
Page 5, Results, citations for projects listed in Table, Lines 206-209;
Page 8, Discussion, citations for implications, Lines 321
- Please add journal paper references throughout the manuscript.
Response: Please see response to #6.
Reviewer 3 Report
This is a very interesting study.
Please consider the following minor comments:
- Please clearly define the study aim.
- The decision of the introduction section into two parts is a little bit confusing (1. introduction and 2. background). Please consider mixing it into one section (headline in lines 72-73 can be removed).
- Please add a reference or 2-3 additional sentences to present more specific data on the University of California San Francisco Truth Tobacco Industry Documents Library. This would be crucial for readers, who are not so familiar with tobacco control research and background.
- Please consider adding 2-3 sentences on practical implications of this study as well as potential further research needs
Author Response
Reviewer #3
- Please clearly define the study aim.
Response: We have re-written the introduction to highlight the research gap and the potential contribution of this research. We have also clarified the aim and objective of this study.
Location: Page 2-3, Introduction, Lines 85-112
- The decision of the introduction section into two parts is a little bit confusing (1. Introduction and 2. Background). Please consider mixing it into one section (headline in lines 72-73 can be removed).
Response: We have consolidated these sections in the introduction.
Location: Page 2
- Please add a reference or 2-3 additional sentences to present more specific data on the University of California San Francisco Truth Tobacco Industry Documents Library. This would be crucial for readers, who are not so familiar with tobacco control research and background.
Response: We have added additional references specific to the Truth Industry Documents.
Location: Page 3, Methods, Lines 130
- Please consider adding 2-3 sentences on practical implications of this study as well as potential further research need.
Response: We have added practical and theoretical implications in the discussion.
Location: Page 7, Discussion, Lines 321-327
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for your revision.
