Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28073035›Full record

ArticleAddictive behaviors2017

Criterion validity of measures of perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco compared to cigarettes.

Alexander Persoskie, Anh B Nguyen, Annette R Kaufman, Cindy Tworek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addictive behaviors, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Developing and Validating Measures of Absolute and Relative E-Cigarette Product Risk Perceptions: Single Items Can Be Surprisingly Comprehensive.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Measuring Cigarette Smoking Risk Perceptions.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

4 authors.

Alexander PersoskieOffice of Science, Center for Tobacco Products, FDA, Silver Spring, MD, USA. Electronic address: alexander.persoskie@fda.hhs.gov.
Anh B NguyenOffice of Science, Center for Tobacco Products, FDA, Silver Spring, MD, USA.
Annette R KaufmanTobacco Control Research Branch, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
Cindy TworekOffice of Science, Center for Tobacco Products, FDA, Silver Spring, MD, USA.

Funding

Intramural FDA HHS FD999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Beliefs about the relative harmfulness of one product compared to another (perceived relative harm) are central to research and regulation concerning tobacco and nicotine-containing products, but techniques for measuring such beliefs vary widely. We compared the validity of direct and indirect measures of perceived harm of e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco (SLT) compared to cigarettes. On direct measures, participants explicitly compare the harmfulness of each product. On indirect measures, participants rate the harmfulness of each product separately, and ratings are compared. The U.S. Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS-FDA-2015; N=3738) included direct measures of perceived harm of e-cigarettes and SLT compared to cigarettes. Indirect measures were created by comparing ratings of harm from e-cigarettes, SLT, and cigarettes on 3-point scales. Logistic regressions tested validity by assessing whether direct and indirect measures were associated with criterion variables including: ever-trying e-cigarettes, ever-trying snus, and SLT use status. Compared to the indirect measures, the direct measures of harm were more consistently associated with criterion variables. On direct measures, 26% of adults rated e-cigarettes as less harmful than cigarettes, and 11% rated SLT as less harmful than cigarettes. Direct measures appear to provide valid information about individuals' harm beliefs, which may be used to inform research and tobacco control policy. Further validation research is encouraged.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeElectronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsHumansReproducibility of ResultsTobacco ProductsTobacco, SmokelessElectronic cigarettesMeasuresPerceived harmSmokeless tobaccoTobaccoValidity

Identifiers

PMID28073035
PMCPMC5257335

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.