Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31647468›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2019

Antismoking Advertisements and Price Promotions and Their Association With the Urge to Smoke and Purchases in a Virtual Convenience Store: Randomized Experiment.

Lauren McCarl Dutra, James Nonnemaker, Brian Bradfield, Nathaniel Taylor, Jamie Guillory, Ashley Feld, Annice Kim

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

7 authors.

Lauren McCarl DutraCenter for Health Policy Science and Tobacco Research, RTI International, Berkeley, CA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8505-7994
James NonnemakerCenter for Health Policy Science and Tobacco Research, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-1044-7482
Brian BradfieldCenter for Health Policy Science and Tobacco Research, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0593-3518
Nathaniel TaylorCenter for Health Policy Science and Tobacco Research, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-3176-9528
Jamie GuilloryPrime Affect Research, Dublin, Ireland.ORCID 0000-0001-9765-2299
Ashley FeldCenter for Health Policy Science and Tobacco Research, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-9943-2545
Annice KimCenter for Health Policy Science and Tobacco Research, RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6585-5876

Funding

The Science of Decision Making: Connecting People and PolicyP50DA036128 · NIDA · GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI ERIKSEN, MICHAEL PAUL · 2013 to 2018
$19.4M
NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA036128
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoint of sale (POS) advertising is associated with smoking initiation, current smoking, and relapse among former smokers. Price promotion bans and antismoking advertisements (ads) are 2 possible interventions for combating POS advertising.

objectiveThe purpose of this analysis was to determine the influence of antismoking ads and promotions on urges to smoke and tobacco purchases.

methodsThis analysis examined exposure to graphic (graphic images depicting physical consequences of tobacco use) and supportive (pictures of and supportive messages from former smokers) antismoking ads and promotions in a virtual convenience store as predictors of urge to smoke and buying tobacco products among 1200 current cigarette smokers and 800 recent quitters recruited via a Web-based panel (analytical n=1970). We constructed linear regression models for urge to smoke and logistic regression models for the odds of purchasing tobacco products, stratified by smoking status.

resultsThe only significant finding was a significant negative relationship between exposure to supportive antismoking ads and urge to smoke among current smokers (beta coefficient=-5.04, 95% CI -9.85 to -0.22; P=.04). There was no significant relationship between graphic antismoking ads and urge to smoke among current smokers (coefficient=-3.77, 95% CI -8.56 to 1.02; P=.12). Neither relationship was significant for recent quitters (graphic: coefficient=-3.42, 95% CI -8.65 to 1.81; P=.15 or supportive: coefficient=-3.82, 95% CI -8.99 to 1.36; P=.20). There were no significant differences in urge to smoke by exposure to promotions for current smokers (coefficient=-1.06, 95% CI -4.53 to 2.41; P=.55) or recent quitters (coefficient=1.76, 95% CI -2.07 to 5.59; P=.37). There were also no differences in tobacco purchases by exposure to graphic (current smokers: coefficient=0.93, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.29; P=.66 and recent quitters: coefficient=0.73, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.19; P=.20) or supportive (current smokers: coefficient=1.05, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.46; P=.78 and recent quitters: coefficient=0.73, 95% CI 0.45 to 1.18; P=.20) antismoking ads or price promotions (current smokers: coefficient=1.09, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.38; P=.49 and recent quitters: coefficient=0.90, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.31; P=.60).

conclusionsThe results of this analysis support future research on the ability of supportive antismoking ads to reduce urges to smoke among current cigarette smokers. Research on urges to smoke has important tobacco control implications, given the relationship between urge to smoke and smoking cigarettes, time to next smoke, and amount smoked.

Indexed as

AdultAdvertisingConsumer BehaviorFemaleHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedSmoking CessationVirtual Realityadvertisementcigarette smokingcommerceconsumer behaviorcravingtobacco products

Identifiers

PMID31647468
PMCPMC6914233

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.