Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30654833›Full record

SynthesisSystematic reviews2019

A systematic review of the perceptions of adolescents on graphic health warnings and plain packaging of cigarettes.

Aaron Drovandi, Peta-Ann Teague, Beverley Glass, Bunmi Malau-Aduli

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.7field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Plain Packaging: One of the Plain Simple Solutions for Nicotine Reduction in the Middle East.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Aaron DrovandiCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Building 047, Pharmacy, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, QLD, 4810, Australia. aaron.drovandi@jcu.edu.au.
Peta-Ann TeagueCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Building 047, Pharmacy, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, QLD, 4810, Australia.
Beverley GlassCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Building 047, Pharmacy, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, QLD, 4810, Australia.
Bunmi Malau-AduliCollege of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University, Building 047, Pharmacy, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, QLD, 4810, Australia.
James Cook University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundGraphic health warnings on tobacco packaging and the plain packaging of tobacco products are key tobacco control interventions. This systematic review investigates the perceptions of adolescents towards these packaging interventions.

methodsPublished, original-research, English-language articles from 1 January 2000 to 1 September 2017 were identified through a systematic literature search of the PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus databases. Articles describing investigations into the perceptions of adolescents aged 11 to 19 years towards graphic health warnings and/or plain-packaged cigarettes were included in this review.

resultsNineteen articles, involving 15,935 adolescent participants, of which 72.85% were non-smokers or ex-smokers and 27.15% occasional or daily smokers, met the eligibility criteria. Graphic health warnings were perceived as more effective than text-only warnings, with warnings depicting lung cancer, and oral diseases being perceived as particularly effective. Health warnings increased viewer fear, anxiety, shock, and guilt and were considered effective in preventing non-smokers from experimenting with tobacco and prompting current smokers to quit. Plain packaging reduced the attractiveness and other positive attributes of cigarette packaging, with darker colours found to be the most effective. When used in combination, plain packaging increased the visibility of graphic health warnings, with participants also perceiving them as having an increased tar content and having more serious health risks, and increased thoughts of quitting amongst smokers.

conclusionsGraphic health warnings and plain packaging appear to increase adolescent awareness of the dangers of tobacco use. Further research into the most effective warnings to use in combination with plain packaging is needed to ensure the greatest reduction in tobacco use and prevent tobacco-attributable morbidity and mortality in this vulnerable population.

Indexed as

PerceptionProduct LabelingProduct PackagingTobacco ProductsAdolescentAdvertisingAttitude to HealthChildFemaleHealth PromotionHumansMaleHealth literacyPublic healthTobacco controlYouth

Identifiers

PMID30654833
PMCPMC6335796
OpenAlexW2911418353

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.