Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Health promotion and public health
Voice and choice: making a case for tailored smoking cessation programmes to support women experiencing homelessness
  1. Maxine Radcliffe1,2,
  2. Thilo Kroll1,
  3. Kate Frazer1
  1. 1 School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
  2. 2 CHO 7, Health Service Executive, Dublin, Ireland
  1. Correspondence to Associate Professor Kate Frazer, School of Nursing, Midwifery and Health Systems, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland; kathleen.frazer{at}ucd.ie

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Commentary on: Homeless women’s perspectives on smoking and smoking cessation programs: a qualitative study. Int J Drug Policy. 2021 Dec 1;98:103377.

Implications for practice and research

  • Voice and choice of women experiencing homelessness must be considered when establishing smoking cessation programmes.

  • Differential exposure to stressful experiences in target populations is significant for health promotion and harm reduction treatment programmes.

Context

People experiencing homelessness are more likely to smoke and face problems that make it difficult to quit; their smoking rates are up to four times higher than the general population; and the leading cause of health problems and death.1 2 Higher rates of homelessness are reported by people with mental health problems, concurrent substance use, belong to ethnic minority groups and/ or self-identify as gender or sexual minorities.2–4 Women experiencing homelessness deal with higher rates of violence and trauma, compared with male counterparts, resulting in higher …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Funding No funding associated with this commentary

  • Competing interests KF reports previous co-authorship with Maya Vijayaraghavan and declares research grant funding paid to employer. MR declares research grant funding paid to employer. TK declares research grant funding paid to employer.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.