Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32546665›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2020

Perceived risk of electronic cigarettes compared with combustible cigarettes: direct versus indirect questioning.

Victoria Churchill, Amy L Nyman, Scott R Weaver, Bo Yang, Jidong Huang, Lucy Popova

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco control, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for measuring vitamin E acetate in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid.Journal of chromatography. B, Analytical technologies in the biomedical and life sciences · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

6 authors.

Victoria ChurchillSchool of Public Health, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0393-3212
Amy L NymanSchool of Public Health, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Scott R WeaverSchool of Public Health, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Bo YangDepartment of Communication, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4783-7310
Jidong HuangSchool of Public Health, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3425-9155
Lucy PopovaSchool of Public Health, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA lpopova1@gsu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3450-4579

Funding

The Science of Decision Making: Connecting People and PolicyP50DA036128 · NIDA · GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI ERIKSEN, MICHAEL PAUL · 2013 to 2018
$19.4M
Communicating harm of new tobacco productsR00CA187460 · NCI · GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI POPOVA, LYUDMILA · 2016 to 2018
$738k
NCI NIH HHS R00 CA187460NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA036128
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTobacco companies claim that a large proportion of the population perceives potential modified risk tobacco products as equally or more harmful than cigarettes, and argue misperceptions need to be corrected using modified risk claims. However, the studies they cite predominantly use one specific measurement of comparative risk. We analysed a representative sample of US adult smokers and non-smokers to examine whether the proportion who report e-cigarettes as less harmful than regular cigarettes differs depending on how the comparative risk questions were presented.

methodsWe analysed data from the 2017 Tobacco Products and Risk Perceptions Survey. Comparative risk of cigarettes and e-cigarettes was measured in two ways: direct (single question) and indirect (by measuring perceived risk of both in separate questions and then subtracting the scores from each other).

resultsWhen asked to compare harms of e-cigarettes and cigarettes directly (single question), 33.9% of participants identified e-cigarettes as less harmful than cigarettes, 36.4% reported equal harm, 4.3% said e-cigarettes were more harmful and 25.3% said 'I don't know'. When asked indirectly (separate questions), 42.1% identified e-cigarettes as less harmful than cigarettes, 23.8% said they were of equal harm, 7.1% perceived e-cigarettes to be more harmful and 27.1% did not know.

conclusionOur study offers evidence to suggest the need to use both direct and indirect risk questions when assessing the public's perceptions of harms associated with novel tobacco products.

Indexed as

electronic nicotine delivery devicespublic opiniontobacco industry

Identifiers

PMID32546665
PMCPMC7975626

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.