Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27994002›Full record

Trial reportNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2017

Effects of Framing Proximal Benefits of Quitting and Motivation to Quit as a Query on Communications About Tobacco Constituents.

Sarah Kowitt, Paschal Sheeran, Kristen Jarman, Leah M Ranney, Allison M Schmidt, Li-Ling Huang, Adam O Goldstein

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2017. 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. A Pilot Randomised Trial Investigating the Effects of Including Efficacy Messaging on Tobacco Warning Labels.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. An Eye Tracking Study of Anti-Smoking Messages on Toxic Chemicals in Cigarettes.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    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

7 authors.

Sarah KowittDepartment of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Paschal SheeranDepartment of Psychology and Neuroscience, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Kristen JarmanLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Leah M RanneyDepartment of Family Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Allison M SchmidtDepartment of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Li-Ling HuangLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
Adam O GoldsteinLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.

Funding

Training & Education Program p294-308P50CA180907 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI RIBISL, KURT M. · 2013 to 2017
$20.2M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA180907
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLittle is known on how to communicate messages on tobacco constituents to tobacco users. This study manipulated three elements of a message in the context of a theory-based communication campaign about tobacco constituents: (1) latency of response efficacy (how soon expected health benefits would accrue), (2) self-efficacy (confidence about quitting), and (3) interrogative cue ("Ready to be tobacco-free?").

methodsSmokers (N = 1669, 55.4% women) were recruited via an online platform, and were randomized to a 3 (Latency of response efficacy) × 2 (Self-efficacy) × 2 (Interrogative cue) factorial design. The dependent variables were believability, credibility, perceived effectiveness of the communication message, and action expectancies (likelihood of seeking additional information and help with quitting).

resultsLatency of response efficacy influenced believability, perceived effectiveness, credibility, and action expectancies. In each case, scores were higher when specific health benefits were said to accrue within 1 month, as compared to general health benefits occurring in a few hours. The interrogative cue had a marginal positive effect on perceived effectiveness. The self-efficacy manipulation had no reliable effects, and there were no significant interactions among conditions.

conclusionsSmokers appear less persuaded by a communication message on constituents where general health benefits accrue immediately (within a few hours) than specific benefits over a longer timeframe (1 month). Additionally, smokers appeared to be more persuaded by messages with an interrogative cue. Such findings may help design more effective communication campaigns on tobacco constituents to smokers. IMPLICATIONS: This paper describes, for the first time, how components of tobacco constituent messages are perceived. We now know that smokers appear to be less persuaded by communication messages where general health benefits accrue immediately (within a few hours) than specific benefits over a longer timeframe (1 month). Additionally, including an interrogative cue ("Ready to be tobacco free?") may make messages more effective, whereas the self-efficacy manipulation designed to increase confidence about quitting had no effect. While messages were universally impactful across smoker subpopulations, everyday smokers and smokers with less trust in the government may be less receptive to communication campaigns.

Indexed as

CommunicationMotivationPersuasive CommunicationAdultFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMaleSmokingSmoking CessationTobacco ProductsUnited StatesUnited States Food and Drug Administration

Identifiers

PMID27994002
PMCPMC5896547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.