Table 2.
Tobacco point-of-sale advertising prevalence. 2008
| Guatemala City, Guatemala | Buenos Aires, Argentina | |||||||||
| Neighbourhood socioeconomic status | Neighbourhood socioeconomic status | |||||||||
| All | High | Middle | Low | All | High | Middle | Low | |||
| 120 | 40 | 40 | 40 | p* | 120 | 40 | 40 | 40 | p | |
| Stores (%) with exterior ads | 3 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0.08 | 10 | 0 | 15 | 14 | 0.4 |
| Stores (%†) with interior ads | ||||||||||
| None | 40 | 22 | 48 | 52 | <0.001 | 18 | 10 | 18 | 35 | 0.07 |
| 1–2 | 34 | 32 | 50 | 22 | 47 | 45 | 55 | 50 | ||
| 3–9 | 23 | 46 | 2 | 25 | 28 | 45 | 26 | 19 | ||
| Stores (%) with interior ads that can be seen from the outside | 18 | 10 | 48 | 47 | 0.005 | 61 | 91 | 77 | 72 | 0.1 |
| Mean (%,SD‡) of the total percentage of space occupied in front of the client | 18.28 (8.37) | 13.57 (4.22) | 17.37 (5.37) | 0.04 | 21.47 (15.20) | 21.94 (20.39) | 26.67 (13.73) | 0.5 | ||
| Stores (%) with tobacco ads/products <50 cm of confectionary | 60 | 77 | 38 | 66 | 0.002 | 52 | 57 | 28 | 54 | 0.03 |
| Stores (%) with ‘No smoking’ signs | 88 | 26 | 2 | 2 | 0.002 | 20 | 24 | 16 | 3 | 0.1 |
| Stores (%) with ‘No sales to minors’ sign | 8 | 13 | 2 | 0 | 0.08 | 57 | 61 | 66 | 31 | 0.1 |
| Stores (%) within 100 metres of a school | 63 | 26 | 70 | 97 | <0.001 | 5 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 0.03 |
p Value for difference between socioeconomic status.
Percentages do not add up to 100% owing to rounding.
%, SD: Refers to the mean and the SD of the total percentage of space that the cigarette counter occupied in front of the client.