Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27450153›Full record

Trial reportAddictive behaviors2016

A longitudinal, naturalistic study of U.S. smokers' trial and adoption of snus.

Jessica L Burris, Amy E Wahlquist, Anthony J Alberg, K Michael Cummings, Kevin M Gray, Elizabeth Garrett-Mayer, Matthew J Carpenter

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Addictive behaviors, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Perceptions of Snus Among US Adult Smokers Given Free Product.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2017
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Tobacco use is not associated with groin hernia repair, a population-based study.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2017
    Observational
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

7 authors.

Jessica L BurrisUniversity of Kentucky, Department of Psychology and Markey Cancer Center, 206 Combs Cancer Research Building, Lexington, KY 40536, USA. Electronic address: burris.jessica@gmail.com.
Amy E WahlquistMedical University of South Carolina, Department of Public Health Sciences and Hollings Cancer Center, 135 Cannon St., Room 302E, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. Electronic address: herrin@musc.edu.
Anthony J AlbergMedical University of South Carolina, Department of Public Health Sciences and Hollings Cancer Center, 86 Jonathan Lucas St., MSC 955, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. Electronic address: alberg@musc.edu.
K Michael CummingsMedical University of South Carolina, Department of Public Health Sciences and Hollings Cancer Center, 86 Jonathan Lucas St., MSC 955, Charleston, SC 29425, USA; Medical University of South Carolina, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science and Hollings Cancer Center, 86 Jonathan Lucas St., MSC 955, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. Electronic address: cummingk@musc.edu.
Kevin M GrayMedical University of South Carolina, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science, 125 Doughty St., Charleston, SC 29425, USA. Electronic address: graykm@musc.edu.
Elizabeth Garrett-MayerMedical University of South Carolina, Department of Public Health Sciences and Hollings Cancer Center, 86 Jonathan Lucas St., MSC 955, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. Electronic address: garrettm@musc.edu.
Matthew J CarpenterMedical University of South Carolina, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Science and Hollings Cancer Center, 86 Jonathan Lucas St., MSC 955, Charleston, SC 29425, USA. Electronic address: carpente@musc.edu.

Funding

Translational Science Laboratory Shared ResourceP30CA138313 · NCI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI John J Lemasters · 2009 to 2026
$42.7M
South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute (SCTR)UL1TR001450 · NCATS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T., FLUME, PATRICK A · 2015 to 2024
$41.1M
South Carolina Clinical & Translational Research Institute (SCTR)UL1TR000062 · NCATS · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI BRADY, KATHLEEN T. · 2012 to 2014
$9.4M
A Novel Trial of Smokeless Tobacco for Cessation Induction in Unmotivated SmokersR01CA154992 · NCI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI CARPENTER, MATTHEW J · 2011 to 2015
$2.0M
The Dynamics of Smoking Cessation After Cancer Diagnosis: A Naturalisitic StudyK07CA181351 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY · PI BURRIS, JESSICA LYNN · 2014 to 2018
$769k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000062NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001450NCI NIH HHS K07 CA181351NCI NIH HHS P30 CA138313NCI NIH HHS R01 CA154992
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

To refine public health policy amidst a changing landscape of tobacco products in the United States, it is first necessary to describe fully the nature of smokers' alternative product use. Little research addresses smokers' snus use, and most studies are limited by small samples, cross-sectional designs, and crude outcome measurement. This study sample includes 626 adult US smokers who denied intention to quit in the next month and were randomized to receive free snus during a 6-week sampling period, after which no snus was provided. Participants were then followed for one year. Outcome data were collected via phone. Participants (mean age: 48.7years) were predominately female, White non-Hispanic. Eighty-four percent reported trial of snus. Eleven percent reported purchase (i.e., adoption). Current use declined from 47.1% at the end of the sampling period to 6.5% at the end of follow-up. Frequency and quantity of snus use among current users was low. Among snus users, 79.3% said it functioned as an alternative to smoking and 58.4% said it provided a means of coping with smoking restrictions; options not mutually exclusive. In logistic regressions, men were more likely to report trial (odds ratio [OR]=2.33, p<0.01) and adoption (OR=1.84, p<0.05) than women. Baseline expectations about the nature of snus use also predicted snus outcomes (OR=1.28-1.78, p<0.05). Smokers showed willingness to try snus, but product interest waned over time. Snus as currently marketed is unlikely to play a prominent role in US tobacco control efforts.

Indexed as

Cross-Sectional StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleMiddle AgedSex DistributionSmokersTobacco, SmokelessUnited StatesHarm reductionNon-cigarette tobacco productSmokeless tobaccoSmokingSnusTobacco industry

Identifiers

PMID27450153
PMCPMC4993634

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.