Association of tobacco retailer count with smoking population versus vaping population in California (2019)

Abstract

Abstract Background Access to tobacco products, including vape products, from local brick-and-mortar stores influences the exposure, uptake, and use of these products in local communities. Methods Licensed tobacco retailers in California were classified as specialized tobacco/vape stores or non-specialized stores by obtaining categories published on Yelp. California smoking and vaping prevalence data were obtained from the 500 cities project and ESRI community analyst tool respectively. A series of simple linear regression tests were performed, at the zip code level, between the retailer count in each store category and smoking/vaping population. The Getis-Ord Gi* and Anselin Local Moran’s I statistics were used for characterization of tobacco retail density hotspots and cold spots. Results The association between CA smoking/vaping population and number of tobacco retailers was statistically significant for all store categories. Variability in smoking population was best explained by variability in non-specialized storefronts(R2=0.84). Spatial variability in tobacco-only storefronts explained the least proportion of variability in the overall smoking population. Similar results were obtained specific to vaping population, although the proportion of population explained by variability in the number of non-specialized storefronts was comparatively lower(R2=0.80). Conclusions Localities with greater numbers of non-specialized tobacco retailers had higher rates of smoking/vaping populations, and this association was much stronger for localities with greater numbers of specialized retailers. Non-specialized storefronts may represent convenient access points for nicotine products, while specialized storefronts may represent critical access points for initiation. Hence, regulations that address the entirety of the tobacco/vaping retail environment by limiting widespread access from non-specialized stores and reducing appeal generated by specialized retailers should be incorporated in future tobacco regulatory science and policymaking.

Keywords

• Tobacco
• Vaping
• Smoking prevalence
• Tobacco Retail
• Ecological study