ArticleJournal of community health2012
Appalachian residents' perspectives on new U.S. cigarette warning labels.
Article in Journal of community health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Addiction Treatment Clients' Reactions to Graphic Warning Labels on Cigarette Packs.Journal of drug issues · 2017Article
- Alcohol harm reduction advertisements: a content analysis of topic, objective, emotional tone, execution and target audience.BMC public health · 2017Article
- Evaluating the perceived effectiveness of pregnancy-related cigarette package health warning labels among different gender/age groups.Addictive behaviors · 2017Article
- Graphic warnings and text warning labels on cigarette packages in Riyadh Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Awareness and perceptions.Annals of thoracic medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration revealed new pictorial warning labels in June 2011 for cigarette packages, yet little is known about how these labels are perceived by U.S. residents. We examined the reactions to and attitudes about the new labels among residents of Appalachian Ohio, a region with a high smoking prevalence. We conducted focus groups with Appalachian Ohio residents between July and October 2011. Participants included healthcare providers (n = 30), community leaders (n = 26), parents (n = 28), and young adult men ages 18-26 (n = 18). Most participants supported the addition of the new labels to U.S. cigarette packages, though many were unaware of the labels prior to the focus groups. Participants did not think the labels would be effective in promoting smoking cessation among smokers in their communities, but they were more positive about the potential of the labels to reduce smoking initiation. Participants reported positive feedback about the more graphic labels, particularly those showing a man with a tracheal stoma or a person with severe oral disease. The labels that include a cartoon image of an ill infant and a man who quit smoking received the most negative feedback. Participants generally supported adding pictorial warning labels to U.S. cigarette packages, but only a few of labels received mostly positive feedback. Results offer early insight into how the new labels may be received if they are put into practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.