ArticleCancer causes & control : CCC2017
Comparing perceived effectiveness of FDA-proposed cigarette packaging graphic health warnings between sexual and gender minorities and heterosexual adults.
Article in Cancer causes & control : CCC, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Minoritized Sexual Identity and Perceived Effectiveness of Instagram Public Health Messaging about E-cigarettes.Journal of health communication · 2022Trial
- Smoking Cessation Among Gender Minority Populations, Cis-women, and Cis-men: Findings From the International Tobacco Control Netherlands Survey.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023Article
- Examining the Effectiveness of the 2012 Canadian Graphic Warning Label Policy Change by Sex, Income, and Education.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023Article
- How do current tobacco warnings compare to the WHO FCTC guidelines: a content analysis of combustible tobacco warnings worldwide.BMJ open · 2023Article
- Emotional Impact of Graphic Health Warnings on Tobacco Packaging: Analysis of Their Content.Europe's journal of psychology · 2022Article
- Differences in Quit Attempts, Successful Quits, Methods, and Motivations in a Longitudinal Cohort of Adult Tobacco Users by Sexual Orientation.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2021Article
- Effectiveness of Cessation Messages Targeting Pregnant and Nonpregnant Female Smokers in the United States: A Cross-Sectional Analysis into the Impact of Pregnancy, Self-Efficacy, and Risk Perception.Maternal and child health journal · 2020Article
- Room 101: are gender-specific cigarette packets the way forward?Irish journal of medical science · 2019Article
- EU anti-smoking graphic warnings on cigarette packets: semiotics and the issue of gender under-representation.Irish journal of medical science · 2019Article
- LGBT Identity and Its Influence on Perceived Effectiveness of Advertisements from a LGBT Tobacco Public Education Campaign.Journal of health communication · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn 2012, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration proposed nine graphic health warnings (GHWs) on cigarette packaging that were rated equally effective across racial/ethnic, education, or income groups of adult smokers. However, data on GHW effectiveness among sexual and gender minority (SGM) adults, who have higher smoking prevalence, are currently lacking. This study analyzed whether perceived effectiveness of GHWs differed by gender and sexual orientation.
methodsData came from a randomized experiment among 1,200 adults with an oversample from low socioeconomic status groups, conducted between 2013 and 2014 in three Massachusetts communities. Participants viewed and rated the effectiveness of nine GHWs. Mixed effects regression models predicted perceived effectiveness with gender and sexual orientation, adjusting for repeated measurements, GHWs viewed, age, race, ethnicity, smoking status, and health status.
resultsFemale heterosexuals rated GHWs as more effective than male heterosexual, lesbian, and transgender and other gender respondents. There was no significant difference between female and male heterosexuals versus gay, male bisexual, or female bisexual respondents. Differences by gender and sexual orientation were consistent across all nine GHWs. Significant correlates of higher perceived effectiveness included certain GHWs, older age, being African-American (vs white), being Hispanic (vs non-Hispanic), having less than high school education (vs associate degree or higher), and being current smokers (vs non-smokers).
conclusionsPerceived effectiveness of GHWs was lower in certain SGM groups. We recommend further studies to understand the underlying mechanisms for these findings and investments in research and policy to communicate anti-smoking messages more effectively to SGM populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.