Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31462579›Full record

Trial reportTobacco control2020

Communicating about chemicals in cigarette smoke: impact on knowledge and misunderstanding.

Allison J Lazard, M Justin Byron, Ellen Peters, Noel T Brewer

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Tobacco control, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Numeracy and memory for risk probabilities and risk outcomes depicted on cigarette warning labels.Health psychology : official journal of the Division of Health Psychology, American Psychological Association · 2020
    Article
  7. 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.

Allison J LazardSchool of Media and Journalism, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2502-2850
M Justin ByronLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1162-9907
Ellen PetersPsychology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA.
Noel T BrewerLineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA ntb@unc.edu.

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

backgroundThe USA must publicly share information about harmful and potentially harmful constituents (chemicals) in tobacco products. We sought to understand whether webpages with chemical information are "understandable and not misleading to a lay person."

methodsParticipants were a national probability sample of US adults and adolescents (

resultsIn phase one, viewing any webpage led to more knowledge of chemicals (48%-54% vs 28% no webpage,

conclusionsKnowledge of chemicals and health effects can increase after viewing a website. Yet, websites may not correct the misunderstanding that some cigarettes are safer.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeSmokersTobacco ProductsAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSmokingcarcinogensmediapublic opinion

Identifiers

PMID31462579
PMCPMC8176391

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.