ArticleTobacco regulatory science2018
Effective Formats for Communicating Risks from Cigarette Smoke Chemicals.
Article in Tobacco regulatory science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- 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
- Communicating about chemicals in cigarette smoke: impact on knowledge and misunderstanding.Tobacco control · 2020Trial
- Message development for a communication campaign to support health warning labels on cigars: a qualitative study.BMC public health · 2024Article
- How do online users perceive health risks during public health emergencies? Empirical evidence from China.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Is a cigarette brand with fewer chemicals safer? Public perceptions in two national US experiments.Journal of behavioral medicine · 2022Article
- Design cues for tobacco communication: Heuristic interpretations and usability of online health information about harmful chemicals.International journal of medical informatics · 2020Article
- Testing a Brief Web-based Intervention to Increase Recognition of Tobacco Constituents.Tobacco regulatory science · 2018Article
- Article
- The effect of cigarillo packaging elements on young adult perceptions of product flavor, taste, smell, and appeal.PloS one · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe US government requires the public display of information about toxic chemicals in cigarettes and smoke by brand in a way that is understandable and not misleading. We sought to identify risk communication formats that meet these goals.
methodsWe conducted 3 online experiments with US adult convenience samples (total N = 1866). Participants viewed a webpage displaying information about chemicals in the smoke of a cigarette brand. Experiment 1 varied the chemicals listed and format for their health effects. Experiments 2 and 3 varied the format of chemical quantities and presence/absence of a visual risk indicator. Outcomes were understandable (increasing knowledge) and not misleading (not reinforcing misperceptions).
resultsInformation about chemicals and health effects increased knowledge of these topics by ~30% (p < .001) compared to no information. Quantity format and use of a risk indicator generally did not affect knowledge. The proportion of participants misled ranged from 0% to 92%, depending on measure. Findings indicated 52% would use a website to search for safer cigarettes. Risk communication formats did little to reduce being misled.
conclusionsSome risk communication formats successfully increased knowledge of chemicals and health effects. However, the formats did little to reduce the proportion of people misled.
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.