Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31883013›Full record

ReviewNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2020

Measuring Cigarette Smoking Risk Perceptions.

Annette R Kaufman, Jenny E Twesten, Jerry Suls, Kevin D McCaul, Jamie S Ostroff, Rebecca A Ferrer, Noel T Brewer, Linda D Cameron, Bonnie Halpern-Felsher, Jennifer L Hay and 7 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

41 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Developing and Validating Measures of Absolute and Relative E-Cigarette Product Risk Perceptions: Single Items Can Be Surprisingly Comprehensive.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Mediational Effects on Motivation to Quit Smoking After Exposure to a Cigarette Pictorial Warning Label Among Young Adults.Annals of behavioral medicine : a publication of the Society of Behavioral Medicine · 2022
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  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

17 authors.

Annette R KaufmanBehavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD.
Jenny E TwestenThe Bizzell Group, LLC, Lanham, MD.
Jerry SulsBehavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD.
Kevin D McCaulDepartment of Psychology, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND.
Jamie S OstroffDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Rebecca A FerrerBehavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD.
Noel T BrewerDepartment of Health Behavior, Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.
Linda D CameronSchool of Social Sciences, Humanities, and the Arts, University of California, Merced, Merced, CA.
Bonnie Halpern-FelsherDivision of Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.
Jennifer L HayDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Elyse R ParkDepartment of Psychiatry and Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA.
Ellen PetersSchool of Journalism and Communication, University of Oregon, Eugene, OR.
David R StrongDepartment of Family Medicine and Public Health, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA.
Erika A WatersDivision of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis, Saint Louis, MO.
Neil D WeinsteinDepartment of Human Ecology, School of Environmental and Biological Sciences, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ.
Paul D WindschitlDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA.
William M P KleinBehavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
DONT KNOW RESPONSES TO PERCEIVED RISK ITEMS: IMPLICATION FOR HEALTH BEHAVIORR03CA177775 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI WATERS, ERIKA A · 2014 to 2015
$186k
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748NCI NIH HHS R03 CA177775
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risk perception is an important construct in many health behavior theories. Smoking risk perceptions are thoughts and feelings about the harms associated with cigarette smoking. Wide variation in the terminology, definition, and assessment of this construct makes it difficult to draw conclusions about the associations of risk perceptions with smoking behaviors. To understand optimal methods of assessing adults' cigarette smoking risk perceptions (among both smokers and nonsmokers), we reviewed best practices from the tobacco control literature, and where gaps were identified, we looked more broadly to the research on risk perceptions in other health domains. Based on this review, we suggest assessments of risk perceptions (1) about multiple smoking-related health harms, (2) about harms over a specific timeframe, and (3) for the person affected by the harm. For the measurement of perceived likelihood in particular (ie, the perceived chance of harm from smoking based largely on deliberative thought), we suggest including (4) unconditional and conditional items (stipulating smoking behavior) and (5) absolute and comparative items and including (6) comparisons to specific populations through (7) direct and indirect assessments. We also suggest including (8) experiential (ostensibly automatic, somatic perceptions of vulnerability to a harm) and affective (emotional reactions to a potential harm) risk perception items. We also offer suggestions for (9) response options and (10) the assessment of risk perception at multiple time points. Researchers can use this resource to inform the selection, use, and future development of smoking risk perception measures. IMPLICATIONS: Incorporating the measurement suggestions for cigarette smoking risk perceptions that are presented will help researchers select items most appropriate for their research questions and will contribute to greater consistency in the assessment of smoking risk perceptions among adults.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeCigarette SmokingHumansPerceptionRisk FactorsSmokersTobacco Products

Identifiers

PMID31883013
PMCPMC7755137

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.