Skip to main content
PLOS ONE logoLink to PLOS ONE
. 2021 Jan 28;16(1):e0245670. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245670

Joint effect of alcohol drinking and tobacco smoking on all-cause mortality and premature death in China: A cohort study

Zhang Hongli 1,2,#, Xueyuan Bi 3,#, Nanbo Zheng 2, Chao Li 1, Kangkang Yan 4,*
Editor: Muhammad Aziz Rahman5
PMCID: PMC7842879  PMID: 33507950

Abstract

Background

Tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking are associated with several diseases, and studies on the joint effects of smoking and drinking are rare.

Objective

This study investigates the joint effects of tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking on all-cause and premature mortality in a contemporary cohort.

Methods

The China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS) is an ongoing nationally representative survey of subjects aged over 45 years in China that was performed every two years for a total of three waves from 2011 to 2015 in China. We used weighted logistic regression models to estimate the joint effects of tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking on all-cause and premature mortality.

Results

After adjusting for prespecified confounders, the odds ratios (ORs) of all-cause mortality were 1.51 (95% CI: 1.09–2.10) and 1.47 (95% CI: 1.03–2.08) in smokers and smokers/drinkers, respectively. Compared with nonsmokers/nondrinkers, the OR of smokers/drinkers for premature death was 3.14 (95% CI: 1.56–6.34). In the female subgroup, there was an approximately 5-fold (OR = 4.95; 95% CI: 2.00–12.27) odds of premature mortality for smokers/drinkers compared to nonsmokers/nondrinkers.

Conclusion

This study found a joint effect of tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking on all-cause and premature mortality among a contemporary and nationally representative cohort in China. Our results suggested that the joint effects were more pronounced in women, but further research is needed.

Introduction

Tobacco smoking is a well-established risk factor for many diseases, including stroke and coronary heart disease [1]. Additionally, several studies, including the British Doctors Study [2], the American Cancer Society Cancer Prevention Study [3] and a pooled analysis of Asian cohorts [4], have shown that tobacco smoking is associated with an increased risk of mortality. It has been reported that tobacco smoking is the second leading risk of mortality worldwide [5,6] and the first leading risk of mortality among Chinese men [7].

Alcohol drinking is another leading risk factor for mortality and disability [8]. Although some studies reported a J-shaped association between alcohol drinking and all-cause mortality, which suggested that low alcohol use may confer some degree of protection [9,10], this view was challenged by recent Mendelian randomization studies and meta-analyses [8,11,12]. These protective associations between moderate alcohol drinking and health may, however, be attributed to the effect of biases (e.g., from study design, confounders, selection of participants) [12,13].

Although the effect of tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking on death has been well documented, studies on the joint effects of these two leading risk factors on all-cause or premature mortality are rare. Therefore, this study aimed to estimate the joint effects of tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking on all-cause and premature mortality by using a nationally representative cohort.

Materials and methods

Study population

Data for this study were drawn from the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS). The baseline survey of this study was conducted in 2011–2012 and involved 17 708 subjects. The details of the study design have been reported previously [14,15]. In summary, it is an ongoing nationally representative survey that was performed every two years for a total of 3 waves from 2011 to 2015 in China. Adults aged 45 years or older living in China were enrolled in the baseline survey and followed up in waves 2, 3 and 4. Subjects were chosen with a multistage stratified sampling design in 450 villages, 150 counties and 28 provinces to ensure the representativeness of the sample and can be weighted to obtain national estimates.

Data collection and variable definition

Each subject was administered a survey interview that included information on date of birth, sex, educational level (illiterate, primary, secondary/high school, college/university or above), marital status (married/divorced/widowed, unmarried), residence status (rural, urban), tobacco smoking habits, alcohol drinking, height and weight, medicine usage and medical history. Blood was also taken for laboratory testing. We defined the history of cardiovascular disease (CVD) if subjects reported having a history of stroke, heart failure or CHD. Overweight was defined as 24 kg/m2 ≤ BMI < 28 kg/m2, and obesity was defined as a BMI ≥ 28 kg/m2. Blood pressure was measured by an Omron model HEM-7200. The SBP and DBP were calculated by averaging the available 3 blood pressure measurements (approximately 45 s apart) for each subject. We defined hypertension as an SBP of 140 mm Hg or more, a DBP of 90 mm Hg or more, or self-reported use of antihypertensive treatment. Diabetes was defined as hemoglobin A1C ≥ 6.5%, use of anti-diabetic medication, or self-reported history of diabetes. Dyslipidemia was defined as the use of dyslipidemia medication or having one of the following conditions: total cholesterol ≥ 6.19 mmol/L, low density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥ 4.14 mmol/L, or triglycerides ≥ 2.27 mmol/L. Subjects were classified as tobacco smokers if they had ever smoked more than 100 cigarettes in their lives. An alcohol drinker was defined as a participant drinking alcoholic beverages at least once a month. Participants were further divided into four groups: nonsmoker/nondrinker, drinker, smoker, and smoker/drinker.

Participant status (dead or alive) was recorded in each wave; however, the death date was only recorded in wave 2 (2013 follow-up). The follow-up rate for the baseline survey (2011) was 80.5%, 69% in urban areas and 94% in rural areas, lower follow-up rate in the year of 2013 in urban areas as is common in most surveys conducted in developing countries. We calculated the age of death from the interval between the date of birth and the death date. In our current analysis, we defined premature death according to the average life expectancy in China in 2011, which died before 72.7 years in men and 76.9 years in women [16]. Detailed information about the data quality management has been estimated previously [17]. Since we were performing secondary analyses of deidentified data, we sought no approval from institutional review boards.

Statistical analysis

Summary statistics for the baseline characteristics and risk factors by sex were computed as the proportions or means and compared across different smoking and drinking status groups by using ANOVA or a chi-square test. Baseline characteristics were also compared between participants with and without missing data. The joint effects of tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking on all-cause and premature mortality were estimated using weighted logistic regression models. Unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were obtained. The multivariable models were adjusted for sex, age, educational level, current residence status, marital status, hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, history of CVD, and overweight or obesity. All reported P values were 2-tailed, and < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Analyses were performed with SAS software version 9.4.

Results

A total of 17708 individual participants were interviewed in the CHARLS, and 17251 participants who were aged 45 years or more were eligible for the current analysis. Of those, 171 participants were excluded due to missing age/sex (n = 38), tobacco smoking (n = 126) or alcohol drinking status (n = 7). The remaining 17080 participants are included in the current analysis. Baseline characteristics were comparable between participants with and without missing data, and most of the variables were non-significant (S3 Table). A total of 26.8% (4583/17080) of participants were both cigarette smokers and alcohol drinkers, with a substantially higher prevalence in male subjects (52.7% [4391/8332] in men and 2.19% [192/8748] in women). The mean age of participants among different smoking and drinking groups ranged from 50.3 to 60.9 years, and most participants were from rural areas and married. The prevalence of overweight or obesity was higher in the nonsmoker/nondrinker group. The prevalence of other cardiovascular-related risk factors (hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, history of CVD) was similar among the four different smoking and drinking groups (Table 1).

Table 1. Baseline characteristics among different smoking and drinking groups by sex.

Nonsmoker/Nondrinker Drinker Smoker Smoker/Drinker P
All participants
Number of subjects 8029 2159 2309 4583
Age (years) 50.30 (10.06) 59.26 (9.83) 60.89 (10.03) 59.57 (9.37) <0.001
Age group <0.001
<50 1798 (22.39) 483 (22.37) 395 (17.11) 868 (18.94)
50–59 2885 (35.93) 754 (34.92) 795 (34.43) 1714 (37.40)
60–69 2077 (25.87) 599 (27.74) 636 (27.54) 1321 (28.82)
70–79 954 (11.88) 247 (11.44) 392 (16.98) 555 (12.11)
≥80 315 (3.92) 76 (3.52) 91 (3.94) 125 (2.73)
Middle school education (%) 2109 (26.32) 669 (31.00) 738 (31.99) 1752 (38.28)
Rural (%) 6236 (77.75) 1656 (76.74) 1839 (79.71) 3603 (78.65) 0.064
Married (%) 6838 (85.17) 1896 (87.86) 1966 (85.15) 4152 (90.60) <0.001
Hypertension (%) 3159 (39.34) 834 (38.63) 810 (35.08) 1764 (38.49) 0.003
Dyslipidemia (%) 2630 (32.76) 659 (30.52) 770 (33.35) 1359 (29.65) 0.001
Diabetes (%) 653 (8.13) 178 (8.24) 167 (7.23) 288 (6.28) 0.001
Overweight or obesity (%)* 2886 (46.29) 712 (42.61) 588 (32.15) 1118 (31.98) <0.001
History of CVD (%) 1211 (15.08) 271 (12.55) 333 (14.42) 556 (12.13) <0.001
Male
Number of subjects 1091 1083 1767 4391
Age (years) 61.42 (10.47) 59.20 (9.96) 60.17 (9.75) 59.37 (9.26) <0.001
Age group <0.001
<50 198 (18.15) 253 (23.36) 319 (18.05) 855 (19.47)
50–59 332 (30.43) 367 (33.89) 638 (36.11) 1655 (37.69)
60–69 308 (28.23) 299 (27.61) 490 (27.73) 1254 (28.56)
70–79 202 (18.52) 124 (11.45) 264 (14.94) 517 (11.77)
≥80 51 (4.67) 40 (3.69) 56 (3.17) 110 (2.51)
Middle school education (%) 428 (39.34) 460 (42.51) 668 (37.83) 1724 (39.32) <0.001
Rural (%) 777 (71.22) 772 (71.35) 1390 (78.75) 3441 (78.38) <0.001
Married (%) 978 (89.64) 1003(92.70) 1563(88.46) 4008(91.28) <0.001
Hypertension (%) 402 (36.85) 425 (39.24) 570 (32.26) 1671 (38.06) <0.001
Dyslipidemia (%) 356 (32.63) 333 (30.75) 573 (32.43) 1300 (29.61) 0.077
Diabetes (%) 76 (6.97) 95 (8.77) 116 (6.56) 275 (6.26) 0.031
Overweight or obesity (%)* 300 (38.56) 342 (42.59) 408 (29.76) 1058 (31.63) <0.001
History of CVD (%) 139 (12.74) 143 (13.20) 197 (11.15) 511 (11.64) 0.292
Female
Number of subjects 6938 1076 542 192
Age (years) 58.97 (9.96) 59.32 (9.70) 63.22 (10.56) 64.30 (10.49) <0.001
Age group <0.001
<50 1600 (23.06) 230 (21.38) 76 (14.02) 13 (6.77)
50–59 2553 (36.80) 387 (35.97) 157 (28.97) 59 (30.73)
60–69 1769 (25.50) 300 (27.88) 146 (26.94) 67 (34.90)
70–79 752 (10.84) 123 (11.43) 128 (23.62) 38 (19.79)
≥80 264 (3.81) 36 (3.35) 35 (6.46) 15 (7.81)
Middle school education (%) 1681 (24.27) 209 (19.42) 70 (12.94) 28 (14.58) <0.001
Rural (%) 5459 (78.77) 884 (82.16) 449 (82.84) 162 (84.82) 0.003
Married (%) 5860 (84.46) 893 (82.99) 403 (74.35) 144 (75.00) <0.001
Hypertension (%) 2757 (39.74) 409 (38.01) 240 (44.28) 93 (48.44) 0.008
Dyslipidemia (%) 2274 (32.78) 326 (30.30) 197 (36.35) 59 (30.73) 0.092
Diabetes (%) 577 (8.32) 83 (7.71) 51 (9.41) 13 (6.77) 0.582
Overweight or obesity (%)* 2586 (47.39) 370 (42.63) 180 (39.30) 60 (39.74) <0.001
History of CVD (%) 1072 (15.45) 128 (11.90) 136 (25.09) 45 (23.44) <0.001

*missing N = 2035 for male and N = 1814 for female.

Fig 1A and 1B and S1 Table shows the joint effect of smoking and drinking on all-cause mortality. Generally, the odds of all-cause mortality were higher in the smoker group (unadjusted OR = 1.75 95% CI: 1.39, 2.19). Similar results were found in the subgroup analysis; smoking in females was associated with a 2.3-fold (unadjusted analysis: OR = 2.34; 95% CI: 1.60–3.43) odds of all-cause mortality. Compared with nonsmokers, the odds of all-cause mortality were higher in smokers/drinkers, and smokers/drinkers increased the odds of all-cause mortality with an OR value equal to 1.75 (95% CI: 1.39–2.19, unadjusted analysis). In the subgroup analysis of females, the OR value was 3.14 (95% CI: 1.82–5.14, unadjusted analysis). (Fig 1A, S1 Table) In multivariable regression, after controlling for confounders, the associations remained significant. The OR values of all-cause mortality were 1.47 (95% CI: 1.03–2.08) and 1.51 (95% CI: 1.09–2.10) in smokers and smokers/drinkers, respectively. In the subgroup analysis, smokers (OR = 1.56; 95% CI: 0.99–2.44) and smokers/drinkers (OR = 2.02; 95% CI: 0.95–4.30) in females were associated with an increase in the odds of all-cause mortality compared with nonsmokers/nondrinkers in females. Although the associations were not significant after controlling for confounders, the lower limits of the 95% CI were close to 1. (Fig 1B, S1 Table).

Fig 1.

Fig 1

A. Unadjusted odds ratio of all-cause mortality among different smoking and drinking groups by sex. B. Adjusted odds ratio of all-cause mortality among different smoking and drinking groups by sex (Adjusted variables include sex, age, middle school education, residence status, marital status, hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, history of CVD, overweight or obesity).

Compared with nonsmokers and nondrinkers, smokers/drinkers were associated with an increase in the odds of premature death in the unadjusted analysis (OR = 2.12; 95% CI: 1.46–3.08). After controlling for confounders, the OR value was 3.14 (95% CI: 1.56–6.34). The odds of premature death were 2.2-fold (adjusted analysis: OR = 2.17; 95% CI: 1.11–4.22) higher in smokers. In the unadjusted analysis, the OR of premature death in smokers was 1.49 (95% CI: 0.90–2.45). In the subgroup analysis, female smoking/drinking was associated with a 5-fold (unadjusted analysis: OR = 5.36; 95% CI: 2.32–12.36; adjusted analysis: OR = 4.95; 95% CI: 2.00–12.27) increase in the odds of premature death. The odds of all-cause and premature mortality were similar and not significant between the nonsmoker/nondrinker group and the drinker group. (Fig 2A and 2B and S2 Table).

Fig 2.

Fig 2

A. Unadjusted odds ratio of premature death among different smoking and drinking groups by sex. B. Adjusted odds ratio of premature death among different smoking and drinking groups by sex (Adjusted variables include sex, age, middle school education, residence status, marital status, hypertension, dyslipidemia, diabetes, history of CVD, overweight or obesity).

Discussion

In our present analysis, we found that alcohol drinking could strengthen the harmful effects of tobacco smoking. Our study indicates that compared with nonsmokers/nondrinkers, smokers and drinkers have 75% higher risks of all-cause mortality or 112% higher risk of premature mortality. The study also indicated that women are likely to have a higher risk of all-cause or premature mortality from the joint effects of tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking than men.

Alcohol drinking has been reported to increase the risk of all-cause mortality with a U- or J-shaped relationship. This indicated a lower risk of mortality among subjects with light to moderate drinking and a higher risk of death among those who are heavy drinkers [9,10]. However, a study from a large cohort showed that the beneficial effects of light and moderate alcohol use were offset by tobacco smoking, and the risk of all-cause mortality increased with smoking intensity from 0.8 (95% CI: 0.6, 1.0) for nonsmokers to 1.0 (0.9, 1.2) for moderate smokers and 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2, 1.7) for heavy smokers [18]. The negative combined effects of smoking and drinking were also reported [19,20]. Our study was consistent with these findings and found that people who are both smokers and drinkers have a higher risk of all-cause mortality.

The premature death of a middle-aged person is often devastating to a household and is often associated with decreased income and mortality in the affected families. Identification of the associated risk is crucial to health planning and policy development [21]. In our study, we also tried to explore the adverse association of this synergistic effect of tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking with premature death. Consistent with the results for all-cause mortality, we found that compared with nonsmokers and nondrinkers, smokers and drinkers were significantly associated with early death, despite the nonsignificance among subgroups by sex due to the small sample size.

It is noteworthy that the sex difference was found in both all-cause mortality and premature death. It has been noted that female smokers and/or drinkers are more likely to have greater mortality risk. This phenomenon has been reported in previous publications [1,4,9,19,22,23] assessing smoking or drinking risk, even among those with existing diseases such as diabetes [24]. The mechanisms underlying the sex difference in mortality may be attributed to their biological or related to differences in smoking behavior between men and women. It seems that men are likely to be exposed to more risks than women, which may confer the risk from smoking or drinking use. This can be derived from our data. In our study, we found that 52.7% of men were both cigarette smokers and alcohol drinkers, whereas only 2.19% were found in women.

Several limitations of the study should be mentioned. First, due to the limited information from this public database, further analysis by drinking amount (the definition of at least once a month of drinking was the only and the largest of frequencies of drinking option) or the cause of death, such as CVD mortality or cancer mortality, is not available. Several studies have shown that the effect of alcohol drinking on mortality is generally found to depend on the amount consumed and presented differently by cause-specific mortality. However, this was argued by other studies suggesting that the nonlinear relationship is explained by the study design or selected bias across age-sex strata [11,12]. Second, this study is an ongoing study, and the follow-up period is relatively short. Combined with the relatively small sample of death events that have been followed, the statistical power is limited for subgroup analysis and sensitivity analysis after excluding individuals who had events in the first five or ten years of follow-up to avoid possible inverse causal relationships. Third, as the date of death was only released for data from the 2013 follow-up survey, information on age of death and premature death can only be obtained for this survey.

In summary, our present analysis indicated that alcohol drinking could further increase the risk of total death or premature death from smoking. Further studies are needed to confirm the higher risk of death from the joint effect of smoking and drinking among the female population.

Supporting information

S1 Table. Odds ratio of all-cause mortality among different smoking and drinking groups by sex.

(DOCX)

S2 Table. Odds ratio of premature death among different smoking and drinking groups by sex.

(DOCX)

S3 Table. Comparison of baseline characteristics between participants with and without missing data.

(DOCX)

S4 Table. Name of variables and datasets of CHARLS data used.

(DOCX)

S1 File

(SAS)

S2 File

(PDF)

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the CHARLS (China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study) participants and trial investigators. This article was prepared using research materials obtained from the Peking University Open Research Data Platform.

Data Availability

All datasets are available from the CHARLS database (charls.pku.edu.cn/pages/data/111/en.html; dataset titles used in this study were 2013 CHARLS Wave2 and 2011 CHARLS Wave1). The authors of the present study had no special privileges in accessing these datasets which other interested researchers would not have.

Funding Statement

The authors received no specific funding for this work.

References

  • 1.Hackshaw A, Morris JK, Boniface S, Tang JL, Milenković D. Low cigarette consumption and risk of coronary heart disease and stroke: meta-analysis of 141 cohort studies in 55 study reports. BMJ. 2018;360:j5855 10.1136/bmj.j5855 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Doll R, Peto R, Boreham J, Sutherland I. Mortality in relation to smoking: 50 years' observations on male British doctors. BMJ. 2004;328(7455):1519 10.1136/bmj.38142.554479.AE [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Thun MJ, Carter BD, Feskanich D, Freedman ND, Prentice R, Lopez AD, et al. 50-year trends in smoking-related mortality in the United States. N Engl J Med. 2013;368(4):351–364. 10.1056/NEJMsa1211127 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Zheng W, McLerran DF, Rolland BA, Fu Z, Boffetta P, He J, et al. Burden of total and cause-specific mortality related to tobacco smoking among adults aged ≥ 45 years in Asia: a pooled analysis of 21 cohorts. PLoS Med. 2014;11(4):e1001631 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001631 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Collaborators GBDRF Forouzanfar MH, Alexander L, Bachman VF, Biryukov S, Brauer M, et al. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 79 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks in 188 countries, 1990–2013: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2013. Lancet. 2015;386(10010):2287–2323. 10.1016/S0140-6736(15)00128-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Collaborators GBDT. Smoking prevalence and attributable disease burden in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015. Lancet. 2017;389(10082):1885–1906. 10.1016/S0140-6736(17)30819-X [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.He J, Gu D, Wu X, Reynolds K, Duan X, Yao C, et al. Major causes of death among men and women in China. N Engl J Med. 2005;353(11):1124–1134. 10.1056/NEJMsa050467 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Collaborators GBDA. Alcohol use and burden for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2018;392(10152):1015–1035. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31310-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Xi B, Veeranki SP, Zhao M, Ma C, Yan Y, Mi J. Relationship of Alcohol Consumption to All-Cause, Cardiovascular, and Cancer-Related Mortality in U.S. Adults. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(8):913–922. 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.06.054 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Wood AM, Kaptoge S, Butterworth AS, Willeit P, Warnakula S, Bolton T, et al. Risk thresholds for alcohol consumption: combined analysis of individual-participant data for 599 912 current drinkers in 83 prospective studies. Lancet. 2018;391(10129):1513–1523. 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)30134-X [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Knott CS, Coombs N, Stamatakis E, Biddulph JP. All cause mortality and the case for age specific alcohol consumption guidelines: pooled analyses of up to 10 population based cohorts. BMJ. 2015;350 10.1136/bmj.h384 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Holmes MV, Dale CE, Zuccolo L, Silverwood RJ, Guo Y, Ye Z, et al. Association between alcohol and cardiovascular disease: Mendelian randomisation analysis based on individual participant data. BMJ. 2014;349 10.1136/bmj.g4164 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Stockwell T, Zhao J, Panwar S, Roemer A, Naimi T, Chikritzhs T. Do "Moderate" Drinkers Have Reduced Mortality Risk? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Alcohol Consumption and All-Cause Mortality. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2016;77(2):185–198. 10.15288/jsad.2016.77.185 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Zhao Y, Hu Y, Smith JP, Strauss J, Yang G. Cohort profile: the China Health and Retirement Longitudinal Study (CHARLS). Int J Epidemiol. 2014;43(1):61–68. 10.1093/ije/dys203 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Khera R, Lu Y, Lu J, Saxena A, Nasir K, Jiang L, et al. Impact of 2017 ACC/AHA guidelines on prevalence of hypertension and eligibility for antihypertensive treatment in United States and China: nationally representative cross sectional study. BMJ. 2018;362:k2357 10.1136/bmj.k2357 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Zhang X, Chen X, Ran G, Ma Y. Adult children's support and self-esteem as mediators in the relationship between attachment and subjective well-being in older adults. Personality and Individual Differences. 2016;97:229–233. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Zhao Y, Strauss J, Yang G. Giles J, Hu P, Hu Y, et al. China health and retirement longitudinal study–2011–2012 national baseline users’ guide Beijing: National School of Development, Peking University; 2013:1–56. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Xu WH, Zhang XL, Gao YT, Xiang YB, Gao LF, Zheng W, et al. Joint effect of tobacco smoking and alcohol consumption on mortality. Prev Med. 2007;45(4):313–319. 10.1016/j.ypmed.2007.05.015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Martelin T, Makela P, Valkonen T. Contribution of deaths related to alcohol or smoking to the sex difference in life expectancy: Finland in the early 1990s. Eur J Public Health. 2004;14(4):422–427. 10.1093/eurpub/14.4.422 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Ebbert JO, Janney CA, Sellers TA, Folsom AR, Cerhan JR. The association of alcohol consumption with coronary heart disease mortality and cancer incidence varies by smoking history. J Gen Intern Med. 2005;20(1):14–20. 10.1111/j.1525-1497.2005.40129.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Peto R, Lopez AD, Norheim OF. Halving premature death. Science. 2014;345(6202):1272 10.1126/science.1259971 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Hurley MA. Light smoking at base-line predicts a higher mortality risk to women than to men; evidence from a cohort with long follow-up. Bmc Public Health. 2014;14:95 10.1186/1471-2458-14-95 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Taghizadeh N, Vonk JM, Boezen HM. Lifetime Smoking History and Cause-Specific Mortality in a Cohort Study with 43 Years of Follow-Up. PLoS One. 2016;11(4):e0153310 10.1371/journal.pone.0153310 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Qin R, Chen T, Lou Q, Yun D. Excess risk of mortality and cardiovascular events associated with smoking among patients with diabetes: meta-analysis of observational prospective studies. Int J Cardiol. 2013;167(2):342–350. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.12.100 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Muhammad Aziz Rahman

20 Oct 2020

PONE-D-20-20926

Joint effect of alcohol use and tobacco smoke on all-cause mortality and premature death in China: a cohort study

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Yan,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please, address the comments from both reviewers for further consideration.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 04 2020 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Associate Professor Dr Muhammad Aziz Rahman,

MBBS, MPH, CertGTC, GCHECTL, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Please refer to any post-hoc corrections to correct for multiple comparisons during your statistical analyses. If these were not performed please justify the reasons. Please refer to our statistical reporting guidelines for assistance (https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines.#loc-statistical-reporting).

3.Thank you for stating the following financial disclosure:

 [No].

At this time, please address the following queries:

  1. Please clarify the sources of funding (financial or material support) for your study. List the grants or organizations that supported your study, including funding received from your institution.

  2. State what role the funders took in the study. If the funders had no role in your study, please state: “The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.”

  3. If any authors received a salary from any of your funders, please state which authors and which funders.

  4. If you did not receive any funding for this study, please state: “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”

Please include your amended statements within your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

4. PLOS requires an ORCID iD for the corresponding author in Editorial Manager on papers submitted after December 6th, 2016. Please ensure that you have an ORCID iD and that it is validated in Editorial Manager. To do this, go to ‘Update my Information’ (in the upper left-hand corner of the main menu), and click on the Fetch/Validate link next to the ORCID field. This will take you to the ORCID site and allow you to create a new iD or authenticate a pre-existing iD in Editorial Manager. Please see the following video for instructions on linking an ORCID iD to your Editorial Manager account: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcclfuvtxQ

5. Your ethics statement should only appear in the Methods section of your manuscript. If your ethics statement is written in any section besides the Methods, please move it to the Methods section and delete it from any other section. Please ensure that your ethics statement is included in your manuscript, as the ethics statement entered into the online submission form will not be published alongside your manuscript.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Partly

Reviewer #2: Partly

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: I Don't Know

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: This is an interesting paper on the combined effect of alcohol consumption and tobacco use on mortality and premature death in China.

However, I see some major limitations to the paper. I see in your discussion section you have mentioned that the paper is limited by not having information on the amount that participants drunk. This is a major limitation. And the definition of at least once a month seems small. Having moderate, heavy drinking would really add to the paper. Is there some other way of modelling this from other studies/datasets? Also not having information on cause of mortality limits the results of this paper significantly.

Are you able to look at different levels of tobacco use and drinking? Currently the paper only looks at "ever" smoking, 100 cigarettes in their lifetime. It would useful also to look smoking frequency. Is this possible?

The manuscript requires a major edit for grammar. I would note some down but without line numbers it is very difficult to do this.

The term tobacco smoke, isn't quite right. Tobacco smoking is more suitable in most places. The background sentence in the abstract doesn't make sense. Something like "Tobacco smoking and alcohol use have been shown to be associated with several diseases, however few studies have looked at the combined effect of smoking and drinking" may be more suitable.

Abstract in the results you don't need a "the" before confounders.

I would use "sex" rather than "gender" in the manuscript and keep this consistent throughout.

I would find it easier to call the groups: non-smoker/non-drinker, smoker, drinker, smoker/drinker. Define it earlier on, but it is confusing to read as it is.

Discussion, third line down you say non-smoker twice.

Reviewer #2: Be more careful with phrasings that insinuate causality.

Present study is representative cohort design. Due to nature of observational study, the results did not showed causality Causal language (including use of terms such as "effect," "efficacy," "cause," and "x increased y") should be used only for randomized trials. For all other study designs (including meta-analyses of randomized trials), methods and results should be described in terms of association or correlation (eg, "x associated with an increase in y") and should avoid cause-and-effect wording.

Recent, the 4th wave of CHARLS (2018) has been released. The data can be updated using 4 waves from 2011 to 2018.

This study have many language/grammar errors. For example, in the section of results of abstract, ’smoker and drinker increased the odds of premature death’.

Please add the definition of outcome in the section of methods.( Premature death defined as mortality before age 72.7 years in men and 76.9 years in women, which were the average life expectancies in China in 2011).

The authors stated that they used weighted logistic regression. I am looking forward to the code for validating their correctness of analysis.

More sensitivity analysis need to be conducted to show the robustness of results. For example, excluding individuals who had events in the first five years of follow-up to avoid possible inverse causal relationships and excluding individuals who had events in the first ten years of follow-up to avoid possible inverse causal relationships.

Please add the proportion of excluded missing data. There should be a mentioning, whether missing of data occurred at random.

Please add the description of lost to follow-up.

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Jan 28;16(1):e0245670. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245670.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


19 Nov 2020

Dear Editor:

Please find our revision of manuscript entitled “Joint effect of alcohol drinking and tobacco smoking on all-cause mortality and premature death in China: a cohort study” which resubmit to the journal of PLoS One for consideration.

First of all, we really thanks for the comments from the editors and reviewers which are important and helpful for promoting quality of this paper. The answers of each points of comments from two reviewers was submitted as a word file named “Response to Reviewers”, and requests of editors and journal including format, ethic statement and so on were also been revised in the manuscript accordingly. In addition, we received no specific funding for this work, and state as “The authors received no specific funding for this work.”, hope you could change the online submission form on our behalf. We also confirm that the authors of the present study had no special access privileges in accessing these datasets which other interested researchers would not have. The Supplementary table 2 specified the all relevant data set names, variables used in this paper.

If you need any more information concerning the manuscript please write to me. I am looking forward to your response.

Sincerely yours.

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 1

Muhammad Aziz Rahman

14 Dec 2020

PONE-D-20-20926R1

Joint effect of alcohol drinking and tobacco smoking on all-cause mortality and premature death in China: a cohort study

PLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Yan,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Jan 28 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Aziz Rahman, MBBS, MPH, CertGTC, GCHECTL, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

Reviewer #2: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: I Don't Know

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

Reviewer #2: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Reviewer #1: This manuscript is much improved. My comments have been addressed. I would suggest a final edit, to ensure that all terminology matches throughout. For example sometimes cigarette smoking is used and sometimes tobacco smoking is used. I would make these consistent.

Reviewer #2: The authors addressed my comments. The paper will be improved if the tables may be made the figures for visualization. Please refer the Figure 2 and Figure 4 in the paper [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-020-05214-4 ]. I have no further concerns.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Reviewer #2: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2021 Jan 28;16(1):e0245670. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0245670.r004

Author response to Decision Letter 1


18 Dec 2020

Reviewer #1:

Q1: This manuscript is much improved. My comments have been addressed. I would suggest a final edit, to ensure that all terminology matches throughout. For example sometimes cigarette smoking is used and sometimes tobacco smoking is used. I would make these consistent.

Answer: Thanks, we have checked the manuscript carefully, and changed cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption to tobacco smoking and alcohol drinking respectively.

Reviewer #2:

Q1: The authors addressed my comments. The paper will be improved if the tables may be made the figures for visualization. Please refer the Figure 2 and Figure 4 in the paper [https://doi.org/10.1007/s00125-020-05214-4 ]. I have no further concerns.

Answer: Thank you for constructive suggestion. We have draw four figures according to the original table2 and table3 to make results visualized. But we still thought original table 2 and table 3 is valuable for detailed information, therefore, we showed the original table 2 and table 3 in the appendix (S1 table and S2 table).

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

Decision Letter 2

Muhammad Aziz Rahman

6 Jan 2021

Joint effect of alcohol drinking and tobacco smoking on all-cause mortality and premature death in China: a cohort study

PONE-D-20-20926R2

Dear Dr. Yan,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Muhammad Aziz Rahman, MBBS, MPH, CertGTC, GCHECTL, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Acceptance letter

Muhammad Aziz Rahman

18 Jan 2021

PONE-D-20-20926R2

Joint effect of alcohol drinking and tobacco smoking on all-cause mortality and premature death in China: a cohort study

Dear Dr. Yan:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Associate Professor Dr. Muhammad Aziz Rahman

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Table. Odds ratio of all-cause mortality among different smoking and drinking groups by sex.

    (DOCX)

    S2 Table. Odds ratio of premature death among different smoking and drinking groups by sex.

    (DOCX)

    S3 Table. Comparison of baseline characteristics between participants with and without missing data.

    (DOCX)

    S4 Table. Name of variables and datasets of CHARLS data used.

    (DOCX)

    S1 File

    (SAS)

    S2 File

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response to Reviewers.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All datasets are available from the CHARLS database (charls.pku.edu.cn/pages/data/111/en.html; dataset titles used in this study were 2013 CHARLS Wave2 and 2011 CHARLS Wave1). The authors of the present study had no special privileges in accessing these datasets which other interested researchers would not have.


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES