Declines in prenatal smoking rates have changed the composition of maternal smokers while public policy during the 1990s has likely made it more difficult to reach them. Medicaid expansions during the 1980s/early 1990s insured more women some time during pregnancy, but the 1996 welfare reform unexpectedly reduced enrollment in Medicaid by eligible pregnant women; overall, insurance coverage has declined since 2000. As the public sector struggles with fewer resources, it is important to understand the sociodemographic characteristics of prenatal smokers, their patterns of care, and nonsmoking risk behaviors. Targeting scarce dollars to certain settings or sub-populations can strengthen the infrastructure for tobacco policy change. We provide more current information on maternal smokers in 2002 based on the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) for 21 states. Data on urban/rural location, insurance coverage, access patterns, and nonsmoking risk behaviors (e.g., abuse) among low-income (<16,000) and other maternal smokers are included. Low-income maternal smokers are the working poor living in predominately urban areas with fewer health care resources than low-income nonsmokers. Over 50% of low-income maternal smokers are uninsured pre-pregnancy and use a clinic as their usual source of care. Regardless of income, smokers exhibit rates of nonsmoking risks that are two to three times those of nonsmokers and high rates of unintended pregnancy (68%) of low-income smokers. These characteristics likely call for a bundle of social support services beyond cessation for smokers to quit and remain smoke-free postpartum.
"Despite these adverse effects, in 2005 around 13 percent of women self-report smoking during pregnancy based on birth certificates or PRAMS data (Tong et al 2009). Although the national data indicate an almost 45 percent drop from the 18.4 percent reported in 1990, at least half of mothers who smoke pre-pregnancy continue to smoke postpartum (Wakschlag, et al., 2003; Adams et al. 2008). With little change in postpartum relapse rates occurring (Colman et al. 2003), permanent changes in maternal smoking will require additional tobacco control efforts. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Smoking during pregnancy has been shown to have significant adverse health effects for new born babies. Smoking is the leading preventable cause of low birth weight of infants who in turn, need more resources at delivery and are more likely to have related health problems in infancy and beyond. Despite these outcomes, many women still smoke during pregnancy. The main question for policy makers is whether tobacco control policies can influence maternal smoking and reduce adverse birth outcomes. We examine this question using data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System data from 2000 to 2005. This is a time period during which states significantly changed their tobacco control policies by raising excise taxes and imposing strong restrictions on indoor smoking. We estimate reduced form models of birth weight and gestational weeks, focusing on the effects of taxes and workplace restrictions on smoking as the policies of interest. We also estimate demand equations for the probability of smoking during the third trimester. Results show that the smoking policies are effective, but limited to babies born to mothers of certain age groups. For babies born to teenage mothers, higher cigarette taxes are associated with small increases in birth weight and gestational weeks. For babies born to mothers ages 25-34, restrictions on smoking in the workplace are associated with small increases in gestational weeks.Institutional subscribers to the NBER working paper series, and residents of developing countries may download this paper without additional charge at www.nber.org.
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Smoking cessation during and after pregnancy can confer many health benefits to women and their children. Smoking behavior
can fluctuate from quitting or reducing during the first trimester to relapses later in pregnancy and postpartum. Abstinence
during pregnancy is associated with level of addiction, socioeconomic status, level of education, maternal age, age to start
smoking, partner's smoking habit, and secondhand smoke exposure. Low-barrier interventions that reach impoverished and disadvantaged
women who are most at risk for smoking and also have the hardest time quitting are needed. At a minimum, pregnant smokers
should be offered self-help materials and a 10-minute face-to-face psychosocial intervention. Offering incentives to pregnant
women to quit smoking is the most effective intervention. Data are inconclusive regarding the efficacy of smoking cessation
pharmacotherapy during pregnancy and postpartum. Because there are also safety concerns about fetal exposure, the use of pharmacotherapy
for pregnant women remains controversial.
KeywordsSmoking cessation-Prenatal counseling-Postpartum relapse prevention-Pharmacotherapy-Financial incentives
Current Cardiovascular Risk Reports 11/2010; 4(6):405-412. DOI:10.1007/s12170-010-0123-7
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The authors show how to use a chaotic circuit as a secure random number generator and given an example using a first-order, nonuniformly sampling, digital phase-locked loop (DPLL) operating in a chaotic regime. The security of the proposed generators is estimated from the information loss property of chaotic systems. For a generator implemented using a chaotic DPLL, two important cases are considered. First, given no prior information concerning the initial conditions of a continuously running circuit, the authors establish how long one should wait after taking a bit before one can securely take another bit. Secondly, given knowledge of the initial conditions at startup (up to measurement and noise uncertainty), they show how long one should wait before starting the bit sampling
Military Communications Conference, 1989. MILCOM '89. Conference Record. Bridging the Gap. Interoperability, Survivability, Security., 1989 IEEE; 11/1989
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.