ArticleFood and drug law journal2017
Communicating Tobacco Product Information to the Public.
Article in Food and drug law journal, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- How people think about the chemicals in cigarette smoke: a systematic review.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Youth and adult understanding of public displays of information about harmful constituents in cigarette smoke.Preventive medicine · 2023Trial
- Effect of Cigarette Constituent Messages With Engagement Text on Intention to Quit Smoking Among Adults Who Smoke Cigarettes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2021Trial
- Is a cigarette brand with fewer chemicals safer? Public perceptions in two national US experiments.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2022Article
- Does smoking affect your skin?Postepy dermatologii i alergologii · 2021Review
- Design cues for tobacco communication: Heuristic interpretations and usability of online health information about harmful chemicals.International journal of medical informatics · 2020Article
- Negative affect, message reactance and perceived risk: how do pictorial cigarette pack warnings change quit intentions?Tobacco control · 2018Article
- Increasing Effectiveness of Messages about Chemicals in Cigarette Smoke.Tobacco regulatory science · 2018Article
- Effective Formats for Communicating Risks from Cigarette Smoke Chemicals.Tobacco regulatory science · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (TCA) requires tobacco companies to disclose information about the harmful chemicals in their products to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The law requires the FDA, in turn, to communicate this information to the public "in a format that is understandable and not misleading to a lay person." But how should the FDA comply with this requirement? What does it mean for information about complex chemicals to be "understandable and not misleading to a lay person"? These questions are not easy ones to answer. Disclosures about the amount of harmful chemicals (constituents) in different tobacco products may help to inform consumers, but may also conversely prompt consumers to reach incorrect or unsupported conclusions about products' relative health risks. This paper first analyzes the FDA's legal obligation to publish tobacco constituent information so that it is "understandable and not misleading to a layperson." Second, it discusses how that legal analysis has guided scientific research examining how members of the public interpret messages regarding tobacco constituents. Lastly, this paper concludes with policy recommendations for the FDA as it considers how to comply with the law's constituent disclosure requirement while still furthering its overall objective of promoting public health.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29398886PMC5794026What 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.