期刊名称：TOBACCO CONTROL
|
ISSN： | 0964-4563
|
|
版本： | SCI-CDE
|
|
出版频率： | Bi-monthly
|
|
出版社： | BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP, BRITISH MED ASSOC HOUSE, TAVISTOCK SQUARE, LONDON, ENGLAND, WC1H 9JR
|
|
出版社网址： | http://bmj.com
|
|
期刊网址： | http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/
| |
影响因子： | 7.552 |
| 主题范畴： | SUBSTANCE ABUSE; PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH |
 期刊简介(About the journal)
投稿须知(Instructions to Authors)
编辑部信息(Editorial Board)
About the journal
"The antismokers are no longer a movement in transition, they are described as having 'come of age'. We only have to read very carefully their own literature and more specifically the new Tobacco Control international journal, which gives you the best digest of their conventional wisdom, of who is doing what, where and with whom's [sic] money ...This is the full editorial board of the 'Tobacco Control Journal'.[shows slide to meeting] I think that these slides speak for themselves. For the industry, THIS IS NOT A GOLDEN CIRCLE but a new wall of Berlin, and we are locked in." From a speech entitled "Our Opponents" to the INMAC Conference, Amsterdam 1992. Go here for the full text.
Tobacco Control is a quarterly scientific journal launched in 1992 to consider all aspects of tobacco prevention and control.
"Essentially, this journal offers a one-stop shopping guide for anti-smoking literature and other resources." Philip Morris 1992.
The journal aims to study:
|
• |
The nature and consequences of tobacco use worldwide |
|
• |
The effect of tobacco use on health, the economy, the environment and society |
|
• |
The efforts of the health community and health advocates to prevent and control tobacco use |
|
• |
The activities of the tobacco industry and its allies to promote tobacco use |
Research Areas:
|
• |
Evaluation of smoking prevention and cessation policies and programmes |
|
• |
Tracking and evaluation of tobacco control policies and legislation |
|
•
| 0c0c0; PADDING-RIGHT: 0.75pt; BORDER-TOP: #c0c0c0; PADDING-LEFT: 0.75pt; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0.75pt; BORDER-LEFT: #c0c0c0; PADDING-TOP: 0.75pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #
|
|
Instructions to Authors
How to submit your manuscript to Tobacco Control
Last updated 7th July 2003
For details on how to submit your manuscript online, via Bench>Press, click here.
For manuscript formatting guidelines please read below.
Editorial Office
Department of Public Health & Community Medicine
University of Sydney, Building A27
Sydney, NSW 2006
Australia
ALL manuscripts should now be submitted online via Bench>Press
If you experience any problems please contact the Tobacco Control Editorial Office
Email: ajones@bmjgroup.com
Fax: +61 2 9351 7420
The principal concern of Tobacco Control is to provide a forum for research, analysis, commentary, and debate on policies, programmes, and strategies that are likely to further the objectives of a comprehensive tobacco control policy. In papers submitted for review the introduction should indicate why the research reported or issues discussed are important in terms of controlling tobacco use, and the discussion section should include an analysis of how the research reported contributes to tobacco control objectives. Papers firmly anchored to a strategic policy and programme context are more likely to be accepted for publication. As the journal seeks to reach an international readership, authors should consider whether their intended submissions address issues or themes, which are likely to be of interest to researchers working in other nations. Overly parochial issues, which contain few lessons for tobacco control policy outside a paper's local context, are unlikely to be given high priority. In considering whether manuscripts should be sent out for review, the editors will generally not give high priority to:
• Local area, state or national studies of tobacco use prevalence and predictors of that use, unless these report genuinely novel or strategically important findings
• Reports of tobacco-attributable disease, again unless these report on hitherto unexamined populations - particularly in less developed nations
• Evaluation studies reporting replications of well-known interventions
Formatting guidelines
[Back to Guidelines for Bench>Press]
All manuscripts should be prepared according to the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals (Vancouver agreement: BMJ 1991; 302: 338-41, N Engl J Med 1991; 324: 42-8).
General points
All material submitted for publication is assumed to be submitted exclusively to the journal unless otherwise stated. Guidelines regarding duplicate or redundant publication have been published in JAMA 1993;270:2495 and have been revised in JAMA 2001;285:1987-91
Tobacco Control is willing to consider papers based wholly or in part on material published on the Internet. However authors should consider an editorial on this subject http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/8/4/355.
• ALL authors of manuscripts ACCEPTED by Tobacco Control must print and sign the Authorship Form linked to these instructions. You will be prompted by email on acceptance. At this time, the form should be faxed to: Alexandra Jones, Editorial Assistant, at +61 2 9351 7420
• Any financial or other relationships that might lead to a conflict of interest should be clearly stated in a covering letter.
• The editor retains the customary right to make changes in style and if necessary to shorten, with the approval of the author(s), material accepted for publication.
• On the cover page, provide name, postal and email address, and telephone and fax numbers of the author to whom correspondence and proofs should be sent. Provide the first and last names and initials, and the main affiliation, of all co-authors. A maximum of four keywords should be provided for use in index compilation.
• Spell out abbreviations the first time they are used.
• Express all scientific measurements (except blood pressure (mmHg)) in standard international (SI) units.
• Permission to reproduce previously published material must be obtained in writing from the copyright holder (usually the publisher); the author(s) and publisher must be acknowledged in the manuscript.
• Authors should keep a copy of the manuscript for reference.
• If requested, authors shall produce the data upon which the manuscript is based for examination by the editor.
Specific points
Original articles
Articles reporting research work may be full length or brief reports. Papers should generally be a maximum of 3500 words in length, excluding references, abstract and "what this paper adds". Exceptions can be made to this, particularly in the case of review articles, qualitative research and tobacco industry document research where the inclusion of important quotations can expand length. The editors will consider the merits of the case for longer papers on a case-by-case basis. In the case of very long papers (>5000 words), the editors at their discretion may offer authors the option of page charges for excessive material judged necessary to the integrity of the paper.
The printed version of the journal has page limits allowed for in the journal¡¯s business plan. Long papers therefore displace smaller papers that might otherwise be published. We have the ability to publish longer papers on the journal¡¯s website, with the abstract in the printed journal. Such publication will still result in the paper being indexed and searchable. Authors should consider that many more people read the website than read the printed journal.
• Articles should generally conform to the conventional format containing a structured abstract, introduction, patients/methods and materials, results, discussion, and references.
• Structured abstracts should have a maximum of 250 words and may include the following headings: objective(s), design, setting, subjects, intervention(s), main outcome measures, results, and conclusions. Use as many of these headings as are appropriate for your article. If possible, use "design", "subjects" , "intervention(s)", and "main outcome measures" instead of "methods". For more detail, see the instructions for preparing structured abstracts at JAMA 1997;277:77-8
• Whenever possible give numbers of patients/subjects studied (not percentages alone).
• All articles may be submitted to outside peer review, statistical assessment, and assessment by the editors; this may take up to ten weeks.
• Authors submitting reports of randomised controlled trials should complete the check-list reproduced below, and should submit this with their manuscript.
• "What this paper adds" box
This box should offer a thumbnail sketch of what your paper adds to the literature, for
readers who would like an overview without reading the whole paper. It should be divided
into two short paragraphs:
Paragraph 1: What is already known on this subject?
In two or three sentences explain what the state of scientific knowledge was in this area before you did your study and why this study needed to be done.
Be clear and specific, not vague. For example you might say:
Numerous observational studies have suggested that tea drinking may be effective in
treating depression, but until now evidence from randomised controlled trials has been
lacking/the only randomised controlled trial to date was underpowered/was carried out in
an unusual population/did not use internationally accepted outcome measures/used too
low a dose of tea.
or:
Evidence from trials of tea therapy in depression have given conflicting results. Although
Sjogren and Smith conducted a systematic review in 1995, a further 15 trials have been
carried out since then
Paragraph 2: What does this study add?
Give a simple answer to the question What do we now know as a result of this study
that we did not know before? For example ¡°This randomised study suggests that tea
drinking has no overall benefit in depression¡±.
Be brief, succinct, specific, and accurate.
You might use the last sentence to summarise any implications for practice, research,
policy, or public health. For example, your study might have asked and answered a new question (one whose relevance has only recently become clear), contradicted a belief, dogma, or previous evidence provided a new perspective on something that is already known in general, or provided evidence of higher methodological quality for a message which is already known.
Special communications
Special communications are papers that do not report original research data but which provide a discussion, analysis, or review of a particular subject.
• Consensus statements should follow guidelines set out by JAMA
Review articles
Review articles provide a review of the literature, usually concerning a particular subject, country, or geographical region. Review manuscripts, including meta-analyses, should include an abstract with the following headings: objective, data sources, study selection, data extraction, data synthesis, and conclusions (for details see the guidelines shown below for Review manuscripts, including meta-analyses, as reproduced from JAMA1955;277:78).
Commentaries
Commentaries are opinion pieces, which are generally one to two journal pages (1000 to 2000 words) in length.
News analysis
News articles should be sent by email to David Simpson at the International Agency on Tobacco Health ds@iath.org. Submissions from, or concerning, developing countries are particularly welcome. We encourage the inclusion of appropriate, high-quality illustrations to accompany news articles. Original illustrations will generally not be returned.
Ad Watch
Ad Watch is a section of the journal where tobacco advertising and promotional techniques, campaigns, and strategies are profiled and analysed. The text of these articles may be brief (letting the pictures "speak for themselves") or may be more in-depth.
Industry Watch
Articles appearing in this section review, analyse, and comment on tobacco industry activities and strategies.
Speaking personally
Articles appearing in this section allow authors to reflect on, and write about, their personal experiences with regard to tobacco use and tobacco control. A more detailed explanation of the type of material sought by the editors for this section of the journal appeared in an earlier issue (Tobacco Control 1993;2:65).
For Debate
Features two divergent views on a controversy in tobacco control. Suggestions for this session should be raised with the Editor.
Covers and cover essays
Ideas and contributions for covers of Tobacco Control should be sent to the Editor. As with previous covers, we would like future covers to be colourful and creative - with a tobacco control theme. Original artwork, anti-tobacco posters, photographs, and cartoons may all be considered. Material with an international flavour is particularly desirable. A cover essay should be submitted to provide appropriate background information and commentary on the proposed cover. Original material or high-quality, camera-ready photographs should be sent to the Editor, and will generally not be returned.
Brief Reports
Brief reports are shorter versions of original articles, should not exceed 1500 words, and may include one table or figure.
Book Reviews
Book reviews are generally commissioned. Books pertaining to tobacco and related areas, such as substance abuse, cancer prevention, and health education, as well as unsolicited book reviews, may be submitted.
The Lighter Side
The Lighter Side reproduces anti-tobacco cartoons. Ideas and submissions should be sent to the editor at the address above. Written permission to reproduce the cartoon should be obtained from the artist, publication, or company holding the copyright, and should be submitted with the cartoon. Parodies, satires, and other humorous material may also be submitted for this section (see, for example, Tobacco Control 1993;2:41-2), and should be sent to the editor.
Play It Again
This section republishes quotes, gaffes, and immortal lines from both friends and foes of Tobacco Control. Send contributions (including an original version or photocopy of the sourced item) to Gene Borio, Tobacco BBS, PO Box 359, Village Station, New York 10014-0359; fax +1001 212 260 6825. Send quotes from online stories (including the full article) or scanned documents (in GIF or JPEG format), to gborio@mindspring.com.
Letters
Letters intended for publication should be a maximum of 500 words, 10references, and one table or figure. Those responding to articles or correspondence published in the journal should be received within six weeks of publication.
• Should not duplicate information given in the text of the article.
• Should have a title.
• Should whenever possible and relevant.
Tables
Where possible, tables should be submitted in the same format as your article and embedded in the article (preferably where cited). Tables should be
self-explanatory, have a title and the data they contain must not be duplicated in the text or figures. Where relevant tables should give numbers of patients/subjects studied (not percentages alone)
Please note:
Bench>Press CANNOT accept Excel files. In extreme circumstances, Excel files can be uploaded as supplementary files; however, if you article is accepted it will be returned to you before processing to enable you to embed the tables in the text. Excel files can easily be copied and pasted into your Word file.
Figures
• Should be used only when data cannot be expressed clearly in any other form.
• Should not duplicate information given in the text of the article.
• Should be accompanied by the numerical data in the case of graphs, scattergrams, and histograms (which may be converted into tables).
• Should include numbers of patients/subjects (not percentages alone) whenever possible and relevant.
• The identity of patients in photographs should be concealed or their written consent to publication obtained.
• Legends should be given on a separate sheet.
• Figures will not be returned.
Black and white illustrations (artwork) should be supplied as (or "exported as") EPS files. Black and white images (photographs) should be supplied as TIFF files, to a minimum of 300 dpi.
Colour images should be formatted as TIFF files, or high quality JPEG files. TIFF files should not exceed 2MB at a minimum resolution of 600 dpi. If you choose a higher resolution your image size should be reduced accordingly to keep the file under 2MB. nb. Scanners may automatically increase image size at a higher resolution.
ALL IMAGES SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO BENCH>PRESS AS SEPARATE FILES AND NOT EMBEDDED IN THE TEXT.
Please note that the BMJ Publishing Group does not accept powerpoint figures. Hardcopies of the figures may be required by reviewers or if the paper is accepted for publication.
Instructions for preparing reports of randomised controlled trials
Authors should follow the guidelines as set out by JAMA. The checklist and flow diagram (below) will be reviewed along with manuscript. If the manuscript is accepted, the flow diagram will be published.
Instructions for preparing structured abstracts
All reports of original data, reviews, including meta-analyses, and consensus statements should be submitted with structured abstracts as described below. The following is adapted from Haynes RB, Mulrow CD, Huth EJ, Altman DG, Gardner MJ. More informative abstracts revisited. Ann Intern Med 1990;113:69-76.
Reports of original data
Authors submitting manuscripts reporting original data should prepare an abstract of no more than 250 words under the following headings: objective, design, setting, patients (or other participants), interventions (if any), main outcome measure(s), results, and conclusions. The content following each heading should be as follows:
Objective - The abstract should begin with a clear statement of the precise objective or question addressed in the report. If more than one objective is addressed the main objective should be indicated and only key secondary objectives stated. If an a priori hypothesis was tested, it should be stated.
Design - The basic design of the study should be described. The duration of follow up, if any, should be stated. As many of the following terms as apply should be used.
• Intervention studies: randomised control trial; non-randomised control trial; double blind, placebo control, crossover trial, before-after trial.
• For studies of screening and diagnostic tests: criterion standard (that is, a widely accepted standard with which a new or alternative test is being compared; this term is preferred to "gold standard"); blinded or masked comparison.
• For studies of prognosis: inception cohort (subjects assembled at a similar and early time in the course of the disorder and followed thereafter); cohort (subjects followed forward in time, but not necessarily from a common starting point), validation cohort or validation sample if the study involves the modelling of clinical predictions.
• For studies of causation: randomised control trial; cohort; case-control; survey (preferred to "cross-sectional study").
• For descriptions of the clinical features of medical disorders: survey; case series.
• For studies that include a formal economic evaluation: cost-effectiveness analysis; cost-utility analysis; cost-benefit analysis.
• For new analyses of existing data sets, the data set should be named and the basic study design disclosed.
Setting - To assist readers to determine the applicability of the report to their own clinical circumstances, the study setting(s) should be described. Of particular importance is whether the setting is the general community, a primary care or referral centre, private or institutional practice, ambulatory or hospital care.
Patients or other participants - The clinical disorders, important eligibility criteria, and key sociodemographic features of patients should be stated. The numbers of participants and how they were selected should be provided (see below), including the number of otherwise eligible subjects who were approached but refused. If matching is used for comparison groups, characteristics that are matched should be specified. In follow-up studies, the proportion of participants who completed the study must be indicated. In intervention studies, the number of patients withdrawn for adverse effects should be given.
For selection procedures, these terms should be used, if appropriate: random sample (where "random" refers to a formal, randomised selection in which all eligible subjects have a fixed and usually equal chance of selection); population-based sample; referred sample; consecutive sample; volunteer sample; convenience sample. These terms assist the reader to determine an important element of the 'generalisability' of the study. They also supplement (rather than duplicate) the terms used by professional indexers when articles are entered into computerised databases.
Intervention(s) - The essential features of any interventions should be described, including their method and duration of administration. The intervention should be named by its most common clinical name - for example, the generic term "chlorthalidone". Common synonyms should be given as well to facilitate electronic text-word searching. This would include the brand name of a drug if a specific product was studied.
Main outcome measure(s) - The primary study outcome measurement(s) should be indicated as planned before data collection began. If the paper does not emphasise the main planned outcomes of a study, this fact should be stated and the reason indicated. If the hypothesis being reported was formulated during or after data collection, this information should be clearly stated.
Results - The main results of the study should be given. Measurements that require explanation for the expected audience of the manuscript should be defined. Important measurements not included in the presentation of results should be declared. As relevant, it should be indicated whether observers were blinded to patient groupings, particularly for subjective measurements. Due to the current limitations of retrieval from electronic databases, results must be given in narrative or point form rather than tabular form if the abstract is to appear in computerised literature services such as Medline. The results should be accompanied by confidence intervals (for example, 95%) and the exact level of statistical significance. For comparative studies, confidence intervals should relate to the differences between groups. For non-significant differences for the major study outcome measure(s), the clinically important difference sought should be stated and the confidence interval for the difference between the groups should be given. When risk changes or effect sizes are given, absolute values should be indicated so that the reader can determine the absolute as well as relative impact of the finding. Approaches such as "number needed to treat" to achieve a unit of benefit are encouraged when appropriate, reporting of relative differences alone is usually inappropriate. If appropriate, studies of screening and diagnostic tests should use the terms "sensitivity", "specificity", and "likelihood ratio." If predictive values or accuracy is given, prevalence or pre-test likelihood should be given as well. No data should be reported in the abstract that do not appear in the rest of the manuscript.
Conclusions - Only those conclusions of the study that are directly supported by the evidence reported should be given, along with their clinical application (avoiding speculation and over-generalisation), and indicating whether additional study is required before the information should be used in usual clinical settings. Equal emphasis must be given to positive and negative findings of equal scientific merit.
To permit quick and selective scanning, the headings outlined above should be included in the abstract. For brevity, parts of the abstract can be written in phrases rather than complete sentences. (For example: "Design. Double-blind randomised trial," rather than" Design. The study was conducted as a double-blind, randomised trial.") This technique may make reading less smooth but facilitates selection scanning and allows more information to be conveyed per unit of space.
Review manuscripts (including meta-analyses)
Authors submitting review manuscripts and reports of the results of meta-analyses should prepare an abstract of no more than 250 words under the following headings: objective, data sources, study selection, data extraction, data synthesis, and conclusions. The manuscript should also include a section addressing the methods used for data sources, study selection, data extraction, and data synthesis. Each heading should be followed by a brief description:
Objective - The abstract should begin with a precise statement of the primary objective of the review. The focus of this statement should be guided by whether the review emphasises factors such as cause, diagnosis, prognosis, therapy, or prevention. It should include information about the specific population, intervention, exposure, and test or outcome that is being reviewed.
Data sources - A succinct summary of data sources should be given, including any time restrictions. Potential sources include experts or research institutions active in the field, computerised databases and published indexes, registries, abstract booklets, conference proceedings, references identified from bibliographies of pertinent articles and books, and companies or manufacturers of tests or agents being reviewed. If a bibliographic database is used, the exact indexing terms used for article retrieval should be stated, including any constraints (for example, English language or human subjects).
Study selection - The abstract should describe the criteria used to select studies for detailed review from among studies identified as relevant to the topic. Details of selection should include particular populations, interventions, outcomes, or methodological designs. The method used to apply these criteria should be specified - for example, blind review, consensus, multiple reviewers. The proportion of initially identified studies that met selection criteria should be stated.
Data extraction - Guidelines used for abstracting data and assessing data quality and validity (such as criteria for causal inference) should be described. The method by which the guidelines were applied should be stated: for example, independent extraction by multiple observers.
Data synthesis - The main results of the review, whether qualitative or quantitative, should be stated. Methods used to obtain these results should be outlined. Meta-analyses should state the major outcomes that were pooled and include odds ratios or effect sizes and if possible, sensitivity analyses. Numerical results should be accompanied by confidence intervals, if applicable, and exact levels of statistical significance. Evaluations of screening and diagnostic tests should address issues of sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratios, receiver operating characteristic curves, and predictive values. Assessments of prognosis should include summarisations of survival characteristics and related variables. Major identified sources of variation between studies should be stated, including differences in treatment protocols, co-interventions, confounders, outcome measures, follow up, and dropout rates.
Conclusions - The conclusions and their applications should be clearly stated, limiting generalisation to the domain of the review. The need for new studies may be suggested.
Consensus statements
Authors submitting manuscripts reporting consensus statements should follow the guidelines set by JAMA
References
• Should be numbered sequentially in the text.
• Authors should NOT use endnote functions for referencing, but should type the references directly into the end of the text. Papers using endnoting will be returned to have this corrected.
•Recommended Format for citing tobacco documents (from January 2002)
Author (Lastname, Firstinitial). Title (or [Created Title] in brackets). Source. Company. Date of Document (Month Day, Year). Access Date: (Month Day, Year). Bates No.: ###########. URL: http://www.pmdocs.com/getallimg.asp?DOCID=2023203794.
Examples:
Christie, D. Proposed Sponsorship of the Film 'Eight Men Out'. Liggett & Meyers. September 21, 1987. Access Date: March 26, 2001. Bates No.: 2023203794. URL: http://www.pmdocs.com/getallimg.asp?DOCID=2023203794.
Scott, S. [PM Memo from Stanley S. Scott to Frank A. Saunders]. Philip Morris. January 31, 1984. Access Date: March 27, 2001. Bates No.: 1005116180. URL: http://www.pmdocs.com/getallimg.asp?DOCID=1005116180
Detailed Instructions for Formatting Citations
Author: Lastname, Firstname, MI. If no Personal Author is named on the document, enter Corporate Author (e.g., Tobacco Institute.) Corporate Author must be entered as "Tobacco Institute," with a comma at the end, or EndNote will reformat it to read "Institute, Tobacco."
Year: The year of the document, e.g., 1978.
Title: The title of the document, entered as completely as possible. If the document lacks an obvious title, create one, placing the created title between brackets, as in: [Letter to Thomas J. Borelli, PhD, Director, Scientific Affairs, Philip Morris Management Corp.]. The brackets indicate that you created the title.
Source: The source from which you got the document, e.g., Guildford Depository, Minnesota Depository, Tobacco Documents Online. Note: if the URL and source together would be redundant, the source field may be left blank.
Company/Institution: The company that produced the document. Note: this is not always the same as Source or URL. For example, the Philip Morris archive contains many Tobacco Institute documents.
Bates Range: The beginning and end Bates numbers. Whatever format given on the web site is fine, such as 2501145890_6076.
Date of Document: The date that appears on the document. Do not enter the year, as it is already noted above. Suggested format: January 10 is the clearest, and overcomes confusion regarding international and U.S. date formats.
Access Date: The date on which you accessed the document. Suggested format: March 22, 2001. Use of access date is a standard in citing electronic resources, but is especially important when working with tobacco industry documents, which are frequently removed from web sites.
Court Case: An optional field, in which you can name the case to which the document pertains.
Further Information: Enter any additional information.
URL: The online access point to the document. While www.pmdocs.com is acceptable, it is far more helpful to give the full URL. The URL given should be the one accessed when you choose "View All Pages," e.g., http://www.pmdocs.com/getallimg.asp?DOCID=2028916320. Note: Please do not cite the URL which ends in PDF, as not all users employ Acrobat Reader.
• Authors are responsible for the accuracy of references.
• At the end of the article the full list of references should give the names and initials of the first three authors, followed by et al if there are more than three. The authors' names are followed by the title of the article; the title of the journal (in italics) abbreviated according to Index Medicus or spelt out in full; the year of publication; the volume number (in bold type); and the first and last page numbers. References to books should give the names of any editors, the place of publication, the publisher, and the year of publication.
• Information from manuscripts not yet in press, papers reported at meetings, or personal communications should be cited in the text, not as formal references. References to personal communications should indicate the type of communication (written, oral, email), the name (and affiliation, if appropriate) of the source of the communication, and the date or approximate date of the communication.
Examples:
Journal article
Warner KE, Goldenhar LM, McLaughlin CG. Cigarette advertising and magazine coverage of the hazards of smoking: a statistical analysis. N Engl J Med 1992;326:305-9.
Chapter in a book
Davidson L, Slade J, Stang CL. Knowledge and attitudes about tobacco among pharmacists who do and who do not sell tobacco. In. Aoki M,Hisamichi S, Tominaga S, eds. Smoking and health 1981.Proceedings of the sixth world conference on smoking and health, Tokyo, 9-12 November 1987. Amsterdam: Excerpta Medica,1988:343-5.
Government publication
US Department of Health and Human Services. Reducing the health consequences of smoking: 25 years of progress. A report of the Surgeon General, 1989. Rockville, Maryland: Centers for Disease Control, Office on Smoking and Health, 1989. (DHHS Publication No (CDC) 89-8411.)
Proofs and reprints
Printers errors alone should be corrected on the proof. Rewriting and alterations may be charged to the author(s).
• Justification for corrections, if necessary, should be given in a letter, not on the proof.
• Reprints are available; an order form and scale of charges are included when the proof is sent out.
Editorial Board
Editor
Simon Chapman
Department of Public Health & Community Medicine
University of Sydney, Building A27
Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia
Tel: +61 2 9351 5203
Fax: +61 2 9351 7420
Email: simonchapman@health.usyd.edu.au
Deputy Editor
K Michael Cummings
Roswell Park Cancer Institute
Dept of Cancer Control and Epidemiology
666 Elm Street, Buffalo
New York 14263-0001, USA
Tel: +1 716 845 8456
Fax: +1 716 845 8487
Email: michael.cummings@roswellpark.org
Editor, News Analysis
David Simpson
International Agency on Tobacco and Health
Tavistock House, Tavistock Square
London WC1H 9LG, UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 7387 9898
Fax: +44 (0)20 7387 9841
Email: ds@iath.or
Editor, Lighter Side
Stan Shatenstein (Canada)
Editorial Assistant
Alexandra Jones (Australia)
Technical Editor
John Weller (UK)
Senior Editors
Amanda Amos (UK)
Lisa Bero (USA)
Patrick Remington (USA)
Melanie Wakefield (Australia)
Consulting Editors for Methods/Statistics
Seth L Emont (USA)
Andrew Hyland (USA)
Michael Siegel (USA)
Todd Rogers (USA)
Regional Editors
Europe: Ann McNeill (London, UK)
Africa: Yussuf Saloojee (South Africa)
North America: Roberta Ferrence (Canada)
Australasia: Michelle Scollo (Australia)
Latin America and the Caribbean: Vera Luiza Costa e Silva (Brazil)
South Asia: Prakash Gupta (India)
Asia-Pacific: Tai Hing Lam (Hong Kong, China)
Middle East: Youssef Bassim (Lebanon)
Associate Editors
Economics of tobacco use, tobacco-related disease, and tobacco control
Frank Chaloupka (USA)
Politics of tobacco control
Gregory N Connolly (USA)
Litigation
Richard Daynard (USA)
Passive smoking
James Repace (USA)
Role of healthcare providers in tobacco control
Tim Lancaster (UK)
Addiction and pharmacology
Jack E Henningfield (USA)
Epidemiology of tobacco use
David Hill (Australia)
Youth and prevention of tobacco use
Jean Forster (USA)
Smoking cessation
C Tracy Orleans (USA)
Health effects of tobacco use
Jonathan M Samet (USA)
Smokeless tobacco
Deborah M Winn (USA)
Use of mass media in tobacco control
John Worden (USA)
Editorial Advisory Board
Chair
Kenneth E Warner (USA)
Vice Chair
Judith Longstaff Mackay (Hong Kong, China)
Consumers International
Mary Assunta (Malaysia)
International Network of Women Against Tobacco
Margaretha Haglund (Sweden)
International Union Against Cancer
Yussuf Saloojee (South Africa)
International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease
Jim Thuesen Pedersen (Denmark)
Latin American Coordination Committee on Smoking Control
Luis Pinillos Ashton (Peru)
International Union for Health Education
Dennis D Tolsma (USA)
International Society and Federation of Cardiology
Lars Wilhelmsen (Sweden)
World Health Organisation
Derek Yach (Switzerland)
Asian Pacific Association for the Control of Tobacco
Kjell Bjarveit (Norway)
Alan Blum (USA)
Ron Borland (Australia)
David Burns (USA)
Neil E Collishaw (Canada)
Richard Doll (UK)
Michael P Eriksen (USA)
Gary Giovino (USA)
Stanton A Glantz (USA)
Nigel Gray (Australia)
Thomas P Houston (USA)
Martin J Jarvis (UK
Luk Joossens (Belgium)
Il-soon Kim (Korea)
C Everett Koop (USA)
Kenneth Kyle (Canada)
Murray Laugesen (New Zealand)
Li Wan-xian (PR China)
Lu Rushan (PR China)
Garfield Mahood (Canada)
Thomas E Novotny (USA)
Michael Pertschuk (USA)
Richard Peto (UK)
John P Pierce (USA)
Alexander Prokhorov (USA)
Martin Raw (UK)
Robert G Robinson (USA)
Donald R Shopland (USA)
Harley Stanton (Australia)
David Sweanor (Canada)
Daniel Tan (Phillipines)
Scott Thompson (USA)
Prakit Vateesatokit (Thailand)
Friedrich J Wiebel (Germany)
Stephen Woodward (Australia)
Witold Zatonski (Poland)
| 
刊名字顺( Alphabetical List of Journals):
返回页首 