Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26063180›Full record

Trial reportHarm reduction journal2015

The impact of free trial acceptance on demand for alternative nicotine products: evidence from experimental auctions.

Matthew C Rousu, Richard J O'Connor, Maansi Bansal-Travers, James M Pitcavage, James F Thrasher

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Harm reduction journal, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Consortium on Methods Evaluating Tobacco: Research Tools to Inform US Food and Drug Administration Regulation of Snus.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2018
    Review
  4. Using Experimental Auctions to Examine Demand for E-Cigarettes.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2017
    Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Matthew C RousuSusquehanna University, 514 University Ave, Selinsgrove, PA, 17870, USA. rousu@susqu.edu.
Richard J O'ConnorRoswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA. Richard.Oconnor@roswellpark.org.
Maansi Bansal-TraversRoswell Park Cancer Institute, Elm and Carlton Streets, Buffalo, NY, 14263, USA. Maansi.Travers@roswellpark.org.
James M PitcavageGeisinger Health System, Danville, PA, 17822, USA. jmpitcavage@geisinger.edu.
James F ThrasherUniversity of South Carolina, 915 Greene Street, Columbia, SC, 29208, USA. thrasher@mailbox.sc.edu.

Funding

Exploring current smokers? interest in using smokeless tobacco productsR01CA141609 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI O'CONNOR, RICHARD J · 2009 to 2013
$2.0M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA141609NCI NIH HHS R01CA141609
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study explored the relationship between product trials and consumer demand for alternative nicotine products (ANP).

methodsAn experimental auction was conducted with 258 adult smokers, wherein participants were randomly assigned to one of four experimental conditions. The participants received the opportunity to try, but did not have to accept, one of three relatively novel ST products (i.e., snus, dissolvable tobacco, or medicinal nicotine), or they were placed into a control group (i.e., no trial). All the participants then bid on all three of these products, as well as on cigarettes. We assessed interest in using ANP based on both trial of the product and bids placed for the products in the experimental auction.

resultsFewer smokers were willing to try snus (44%) than dissolvable tobacco (64%) or medicine nicotine (68%). For snus, we find modest evidence suggesting that willingness to try is associated with greater demand for the product. For dissolvable tobacco or medicinal nicotine, we find no evidence that those who accept the product trial have higher demand for the product.

conclusionsFree trials of a novel ANP were not strongly associated with product demand, as assessed by willingness to pay. Given the debate over the potential for ANP to reduce the harm from smoking, these results are important in understanding the impact of free trial offers on adoption of ST product as a strategy to reduce harm from tobacco use.

Indexed as

AdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient Acceptance of Health CareSmoking CessationSouth CarolinaTobacco, SmokelessTobacco Use Cessation DevicesTobacco Use Disorder

Identifiers

PMID26063180
PMCPMC4468811

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.