Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30562376›Full record

ArticlePloS one2018

Do pictorial health warnings on waterpipe tobacco packs matter? Recall effectiveness among Egyptian waterpipe smokers & non-smokers.

Aya Mostafa, Heba Tallah Mohammed, Rasha Saad Hussein, Wafaa Mohamed Hussein, Mahmoud Elhabiby, Wael Safwat, Sahar Labib, Aisha Aboul Fotouh

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. A Scoping Review of Tobacco Control Health Communication in Africa: Moving towards Involving Young People.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Waterpipe smoking: the pressing need for risk communication.Expert review of respiratory medicine · 2019
    Review
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

8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Aya MostafaDepartment of Community, Environmental, and Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.ORCID 0000-0002-0329-7503
Heba Tallah MohammedDepartment of Community, Environmental, and Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Rasha Saad HusseinDepartment of Community, Environmental, and Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Wafaa Mohamed HusseinDepartment of Community, Environmental, and Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Mahmoud ElhabibyDepartment of Psychiatry Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Wael SafwatEgyptian Tobacco Control Coalition, Cairo, Egypt.
Sahar LabibTobacco Control Unit, Ministry of Health, Cairo, Egypt.
Aisha Aboul FotouhDepartment of Community, Environmental, and Occupational Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.
Ain Shams University · EG

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDespite the global rise in waterpipe tobacco smoking (WTS), the effectiveness of waterpipe tobacco health warnings remain understudied, especially in countries with high WTS rates. Egypt has been employing waterpipe tobacco labelling for a decade, however, their effectiveness is unknown. Our overall aim was to measure the effectiveness of pictorial health warnings (PHWs) on waterpipe tobacco packs (WTPs) through participant memory recall and to investigate whether they induced behavioural responses in waterpipe smokers and deterred uptake of WTS in non-smokers, examining the differentials of effectiveness among socio-demographic subgroups. SUBJECTS AND

methodsWe conducted two surveys including 1490 adult current waterpipe smokers, 73 former waterpipe smokers, and 451 non-smokers in Cairo and a rural village in Egypt between 2015-2017. Participants who noticed PHWs on WTPs were asked questions about salience, communication of health risks, public support, cognitive processing, and self-reported behavioural responses (current waterpipe smokers: reduce consumption, forgo a smoke, quit attempts; former waterpipe smokers: quit; non-smokers: deter WTS initiation). Univariate and multivariable statistical analyses were performed.

resultsParticipants' mean age was 35 years, mostly males (90.4%), waterpipe smokers (74.0%) and rural residents (59.3%). Approximately two-thirds of participants noticed PHWs on WTPs. Salience was significantly less among females, urban residents and participants with high literacy. More than three-quarters of participants reported that WTS health risks were communicated through the warnings. At least half of participants cognitively processed the warnings: 56.3% thought of the warnings when WTPs were out of sight; non-smokers understood the warnings (83.2%) and discussed them with others (90.3%) significantly more than current (76.0% and 72.5%, respectively) and former waterpipe smokers (81.0% and 61.9%, respectively). Participants reported that PHWs on WTPs motivated 58.5% of waterpipe smokers to think about quitting; 64.5% to reduce their consumption; 42.2% to forgo a smoke; 24.5% to attempt to quit; 57.1% of former waterpipe smokers to successfully quit; and 59.3% of non-smokers to remain smoke-free.

conclusionsFindings suggest that inserting PHWs on WTPs is an effective waterpipe tobacco labelling policy. Countries with similarly high rates of WTS should consider adopting WTP PHWs within a comprehensive regulatory framework.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultCognitionEgyptFemaleHealth Risk BehaviorsHumansLiteracyMaleNon-SmokersProduct LabelingSmokersSmoking CessationSocial SupportSurveys and QuestionnairesTobacco, Waterpipe

Identifiers

PMID30562376
PMCPMC6298733
OpenAlexW2905523970

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.