Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29142532›Full record

ArticleTobacco induced diseases2017

A longitudinal study of the relationship between receptivity to e-cigarette advertisements and e-cigarette use among baseline non-users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes, United States.

Israel T Agaku, Kevin Davis, Deesha Patel, Paul Shafer, Shanna Cox, William Ridgeway, Brian A King

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco induced diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Young Adult Responses to Peer Crowd-Based Targeting in E-cigarette Advertisements: An Experimental Study.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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.

Israel T AgakuOffice on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Mailstop F-79, Atlanta, GA 30341 USA.
Kevin DavisRTI International, Atlanta, GA USA.
Deesha PatelOffice on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Mailstop F-79, Atlanta, GA 30341 USA.
Paul ShaferRTI International, Atlanta, GA USA.
Shanna CoxOffice on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Mailstop F-79, Atlanta, GA 30341 USA.
William RidgewayRTI International, Atlanta, GA USA.
Brian A KingOffice on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 4770 Buford Hwy NE, Mailstop F-79, Atlanta, GA 30341 USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe investigated the relationship between receptivity to electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) advertisements at baseline and e-cigarette use at follow-up among adult baseline non-users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes.

methodsA nationally representative online panel was used to survey non-users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes (

resultsAmong baseline non-users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes, 16.6% reported exposure to e-cigarette advertisements at baseline; overall mean receptivity score was 2.77. Among baseline non-users who reported exposure to e-cigarette advertisements, incidence of e-cigarette use at follow-up was 2.7%; among baseline non-users who reported not being exposed to e-cigarette advertisements, incidence of e-cigarette use at follow-up was 1.3%. The attributable risk percentage for e-cigarette initiation from e-cigarette advertisement exposure was 59.3%; the population attributable risk percentage from e-cigarette advertisement exposure was 22.6%. Receptivity at baseline was associated with e-cigarette use at follow-up (aOR = 1.57; 95% CI = 1.04-2.37).

conclusionsReceptivity to e-cigarette advertisements at baseline was associated with greater odds of e-cigarette use at follow-up among baseline non-users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Understanding the role of advertising in e-cigarette initiation could help inform public health policy.

Indexed as

AdvertisementsE-cigarettesInitiationPolicyReceptivityTobacco control

Identifiers

PMID29142532
PMCPMC5674854

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.