Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27525045›Full record

ArticleJournal of smoking cessation2016

Impact of graphic pack warnings on adult smokers' quitting activities: Findings from the ITC Southeast Asia Survey (2005-2014).

Lin Li, Ahmed I Fathelrahman, Ron Borland, Maizurah Omar, Geoffrey T Fong, Anne C K Quah, Buppha Sirirassamee, Hua-Hie Yong

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of smoking cessation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

8 authors.

Lin LiNigel Gray Fellowship Group, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
Ahmed I FathelrahmanNational Poison Center, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Minden, Penang, Malaysia; College of Pharmacy, Qassim University, 51452 Buraidah, Saudi Arabia.
Ron BorlandNigel Gray Fellowship Group, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
Maizurah OmarNational Poison Center, Universiti Sains Malaysia, 11800 Minden, Penang, Malaysia.
Geoffrey T FongDepartment of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1, Canada; Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1L7, Canada; School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Anne C K QuahDepartment of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Buppha SirirassameeInstitute for Population and Social Research, Mahidol University Salaya, Phutthamonthon, Nakhon Pathom 73170, Thailand.
Hua-Hie YongNigel Gray Fellowship Group, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.

Funding

Project 3: Policy Effects on Cigarette Design, Emissions &BehaviorP50CA111236 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI CUMMINGS, KENNETH MICHAEL · 2004 to 2009
$8.2M
International Tobacco Policy SurveyR01CA100362 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO · PI FONG, GEOFFREY T · 2005 to 2013
$4.7M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA111236NCI NIH HHS R01 CA100362
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Malaysia introduced graphic health warning labels (GHWLs) on all tobacco packages in 2009. We aimed to examine if implementing GHWLs led to stronger warning reactions (e.g., thinking about the health risks of smoking) and an increase in subsequent quitting activities; and to examine how reactions changed over time since the implementation of the GHWLs in Malaysia and Thailand where GHWL size increased from 50-55% in 2010. Data came from six waves (2005-2014) of the International Tobacco Control Southeast Asia Survey. Between 3,706 and 4,422 smokers were interviewed across these two countries at each survey wave. Measures included salience of warnings, cognitive responses (i.e., thinking about the health risks and being more likely to quit smoking), forgoing cigarettes, and avoiding warnings. The main outcome was subsequent quit attempts. Following the implementation of GHWLs in Malaysia, reactions increased, in some cases to levels similar to the larger Thai warnings, but declined over time. In Thailand, reactions increased following implementation, with no decline for several years, and no clear effect of the small increase in warning size. Reactions, mainly cognitive responses, were consistently predictive of quit attempts in Thailand, but this was only consistently so in Malaysia after the change to GHWLs. In conclusion, GHWLs are responded to more frequently, and generate more quit attempts, but warning wear-out is not consistent in these two countries, perhaps due to differences in other tobacco control efforts.

Indexed as

health warningsMalaysiaThailandtobacco packaging

Identifiers

PMID27525045
PMCPMC4980081

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.