Trial reportPreventive medicine2014
The impact of product information and trials on demand for smokeless tobacco and cigarettes: evidence from experimental auctions.
Trial report in Preventive medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review of Health Communication for Non-Cigarette Tobacco Products.Health communication · 2019Pooled it
- The Impact of Smokeless Tobacco Risk Information on Smokers' Risk Perceptions and Use Intentions: A News Media Experiment.Health communication · 2019Trial
- The impact of free trial acceptance on demand for alternative nicotine products: evidence from experimental auctions.Harm reduction journal · 2015Trial
- Does Winning an Experimental Auction Change People's Behavior? An Application to E-cigarettes.Journal of economic behavior & organization · 2018Article
- The Effect of Tobacco Control Policies on US Smokeless Tobacco Use: A Structured Review.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2017Review
- Effect of brand and advertising medium on demand for e-cigarettes: Evidence from an experimental auction.Preventive medicine reports · 2017Article
- Naturalistic assessment of demand for cigarettes, snus, and nicotine gum.Psychopharmacology · 2017Article
- Interviews with smokers about smokeless tobacco products, risk messages and news articles.Tobacco control · 2016Article
- Associations between perceptions of e-cigarette advertising and interest in product trial amongst US adult smokers and non-smokers: results from an internet-based pilot survey.Tobacco induced diseases · 2015Article
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
introductionEpidemiological and toxicological evidence suggests lower risk of smokeless tobacco (ST) products compared to cigarettes. Less is known, however, about consumer perceptions and use of novel forms of ST, including snus and dissolvable tobacco.
methodsIn this study, we conducted in-person experimental auctions in Buffalo, NY, Columbia, SC, and Selinsgrove, PA with 571 smokers to test the impact of information and product trials on smokers' preferences. Auctions were conducted between November 2010-November 2011.
resultsWe found no evidence of an impact of product trials on demand in our auctions. Anti-ST information increased demand for cigarettes when presented alone, but when presented with pro-ST information it decreased demand for cigarettes. It did not decrease demand for ST products. Anti-smoking information increased demand for ST products, but did not affect cigarette demand.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that credible and effective communications about tobacco harm reduction should reinforce the negative effects of smoking.
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.