Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31582956›Full record

ReviewTobacco induced diseases2019

Pro-tobacco marketing and anti-tobacco campaigns aimed at vulnerable populations: A review of the literature.

Tess Boley Cruz, Shyanika W Rose, Brianna A Lienemann, M Justin Byron, Helen I Meissner, Lourdes Baezconde-Garbanati, Li-Ling Huang, Dana M Carroll, Claradina Soto, Jennifer B Unger

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Tobacco induced diseases, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

79 citing papers in PubMed, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Demographic factors and rural residence history associated with smoking history.Journal of the American Association of Nurse Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Patterns of ENDS-Related Content Exposure on Social Media Among US Adolescents and Young Adults.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Advancing Science, Improving Health, and Saving Lives in an Evolving Research Landscape.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    Article
  12. Social Media Engagement and Quit Intentions Among Youth With Exclusive E-cigarette Use: The Moderating Role of Social Norms.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Tess Boley CruzKeck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States.
Shyanika W RoseTruth Initiative Schroeder Institute, Washington, United States.
Brianna A LienemannKeck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States.
M Justin ByronDepartment of Family Medicine, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, United States.
Helen I MeissnerOffice of Disease Prevention, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, United States.
Lourdes Baezconde-GarbanatiKeck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States.
Li-Ling HuangGlobal Health and Health Security, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Dana M CarrollMasonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, United States.
Claradina SotoKeck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States.
Jennifer B UngerKeck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States.
University of Southern California · USAmerican Legacy Foundation · USNational Institutes of Health · USTaipei Medical University · TWUniversity of Minnesota · USUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

USC Tobacco Center of Regulatory ScienceU54CA180905 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Jennifer Beth Unger · 2018 to 2026
$39.0M
USC Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science (TCORS) for Vulnerable PopulationsP50CA180905 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI PENTZ, MARY ANN, SAMET, JONATHAN M · 2013 to 2017
$20.1M
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA180905NCI NIH HHS U54 CA180905
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionWe reviewed research literature on pro-tobacco marketing and anti-tobacco campaigns targeting eight vulnerable populations to determine key findings and research gaps. Results can inform tobacco policy and control efforts and the design of public education campaigns for these groups.

methodsFive journal databases in medicine, communication, and science, were used to identify 8875 peer-reviewed, original articles in English, published in the period 2004-2018. There were 144 articles that met inclusion criteria on pro-tobacco marketing or anti-tobacco campaigns aimed at eight US groups: women of reproductive age, racial/ethnic minority groups (African American, Hispanic/Latino, Asian/Pacific Islander and American Indian/Alaska Native), Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender (LGBT) populations, groups with low socioeconomic status, rural/inner city residents, military/veterans, and people with mental health or medical co-morbidities. We summarized the number of articles for each population, type of tobacco, and pro-tobacco or anti-tobacco focus. Narrative summaries were organized by population and by pro-tobacco or anti-tobacco focus, with key strategies and gaps by group.

resultsThere were more studies on pro-tobacco marketing rather than anti-tobacco campaigns, and on cigarettes rather than other tobacco products. Major gaps included studies on Asian Americans, American Indian/Alaska Natives, pregnant women, LGBT populations, and those with mental health or medical co-morbidities. Gaps related to tobacco products were found for hookah, snus, and pipe/roll-your-own tobacco in the pro-tobacco studies, and for all products except cigarettes in anti-tobacco studies. Common tobacco industry methods used were tailoring of product and package design and messages that were used to reach and appeal to different sociodemographic groups. Studies varied by research design making it difficult to compare results.

conclusionsWe found major research gaps for specific groups and tobacco products. Public education campaigns need a stronger foundation in empirical studies focused on these populations. Research and practice would benefit from studies that permit comparisons across studies.

Indexed as

anti-tobaccocampaignsmarketingpro-tobaccovulnerable populations

Identifiers

PMID31582956
PMCPMC6770621
OpenAlexW2974393153

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.