Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30840639›Full record

ArticlePloS one2019

Interest in "organic," "natural," and "additive-free" cigarettes after hearing about toxic chemicals in cigarette smoke.

Sabeeh A Baig, M Justin Byron, Jessica K Pepper, Noel T Brewer

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 49% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Sociodemographic and Smoking Characteristics Associated With Low Perceived Harm of "Organic" and "Additive-Free" Tobacco Products Among US Adults.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Trends in Overall and Menthol Market Shares of Leading Cigarette Brands in the USA: 2014-2019.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sabeeh A BaigDepartment of Sociomedical Sciences, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, New York, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-1482-7127
M Justin ByronDepartment of Health Behavior, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Jessica K PepperCenter for Health Policy Science & Tobacco Research, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, United States of America.
Noel T BrewerDepartment of Health Behavior, UNC Gillings School of Global Public Health, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, United States of America.
Columbia University · USRTI International · USUniversity of North Carolina Health Care · US

Funding

Training & Education Program p294-308P50CA180907 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI RIBISL, KURT M. · 2013 to 2017
$20.2M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA180907
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe US Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act requires the government to disseminate information about the toxic chemicals in cigarette smoke. We sought to understand how the descriptors "organic," "natural," or "additive-free" affect smokers' interest in cigarettes in the context of information about chemicals in cigarette smoke.

methodsParticipants were a national probability sample of 1,101 US adult (ages ≥18) smokers recruited in 2014-2015. A between-subjects experiment randomized participants in a telephone survey to 1 of 4 cigarette descriptors: "organic," "natural," "additive-free," or "ultra-light" (control). The outcome was expected interest in cigarettes with the experimentally assigned descriptor, after learning that 2 chemicals (hydrogen cyanide and lead) are in cigarette smoke. Experimental data analysis was conducted in 2016-2017.

resultsSmokers indicated greater expected interest in "organic," "natural," and "additive-free" cigarettes than "ultra-light" cigarettes (all p <.001) after learning that hydrogen cyanide and lead were in cigarette smoke. Smokers who intended to quit in the next 6 months expressed greater expected interest in the 4 types of cigarettes ("organic," "natural," "additive-free," and "ultra-light") compared to smokers not intending to quit (p <.001).

conclusionsSmokers, especially those intending to quit, may be more inclined towards cigarettes described as "organic," "natural," and "additive-free" in the context of chemical information. An accumulating body of evidence shows that the US should fully restrict use of "organic" and "natural" descriptors for tobacco products as it has done for "additive-free" and "light" descriptors.

Indexed as

IntentionSmokersSmokingSmoking CessationTobacco ProductsAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle Aged

Identifiers

PMID30840639
PMCPMC6402619
OpenAlexW2922203190

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.