Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27221096›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2016

Obsolete tobacco control themes can be hazardous to public health: the need for updating views on absolute product risks and harm reduction.

Lynn T Kozlowski, David B Abrams

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Is Adolescent E-Cigarette Use Associated With Subsequent Smoking? A New Look.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2022
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Tobacco Harm Reduction as a Path to Restore Trust in Tobacco Control.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The Gateway Effect of E-cigarettes: Reflections on Main Criticisms.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Another Article About E-Cigarettes: Why Should I Care?Journal of the American Heart Association · 2018
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

2 authors.

Lynn T KozlowskiDepartment of Community Health and Health Behavior, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY, 14214-8028, USA. lk22@buffalo.edu.
David B AbramsThe Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies, Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLeading themes have guided tobacco control efforts, and these themes have changed over the decades. When questions arose about health risks of tobacco, they focused on two key themes: 1) how bad is the problem (i.e., absolute risk) and 2) what can be done to reduce the risk without cessation (i.e., prospects for harm reduction). Using the United States since 1964 as an example, we outline the leading themes that have arisen in response to these two questions. Initially, there was the recognition that "cigarettes are hazardous to health" and an acceptance of safer alternative tobacco products (cigars, pipes, light/lower-tar cigarettes). In the 1980s there was the creation of the seminal theme that "Cigarettes are lethal when used as intended and kill more people than heroin, cocaine, alcohol, AIDS, fires, homicide, suicide, and automobile crashes combined." By around 2000, support for a less-dangerous light/lower tar cigarette was gone, and harm reduction claims were avoided for products like cigars and even for smokeless tobacco which were summarized as "unsafe" or "not a safe alternative to cigarettes." DISCUSSION: The Surgeon General in 2014 concluded that by far the greatest danger to public health was from cigarettes and other combusted products. At the same time the evidence base for smokeless tobacco and alternative nicotine delivery systems (ANDS) had grown. Product innovation and tobacco/nicotine bio-behavioral, epidemiological and public health sciences demonstrate that low nitrosamine smokeless tobacco (e.g., Swedish snus), and ANDS have substantially lower harms than cigarettes. Going forward, it is important to sharpen themes and key messages of tobacco control, while continuing to emphasize the extreme lethality of the inhaled smoke from cigarettes or from use of any combusting tobacco product. Implications of updating the leading themes for regulation, policymaking and advocacy in tobacco control are proposed as an important next step. A new reframing can align action plans to more powerfully and rapidly achieve population-level benefit and minimize harm to eliminate in our lifetime the use of the most deadly combustible tobacco products and thus prevent the premature deaths of 1 billion people projected to occur worldwide by 2100.

Indexed as

Harm ReductionTobacco Use Cessation DevicesAdvertisingHumansPolicy MakingPublic HealthRiskSmokingSmoking CessationSmoking PreventionTobacco IndustryUnited StatesElectronic cigarettesHarm reductionNicotineRisk communicationSmokeless tobaccoSmokingSnusTobacco policyVapingWarning labels

Identifiers

PMID27221096
PMCPMC4878038

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.