Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33575516›Full record

ArticleTobacco prevention & cessation2021

Smokers' perceptions of different classes of cigarette brand descriptors.

Nicholas J Felicione, Kaila J Norton, Maansi Bansal-Travers, Vaughan W Rees, K Michael Cummings, Richard J O'Connor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco prevention & cessation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Nicholas J FelicioneDepartment of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, United States.
Kaila J NortonThe Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, United States.
Maansi Bansal-TraversDepartment of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, United States.
Vaughan W ReesDepartment of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States.
K Michael CummingsDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, United States.
Richard J O'ConnorDepartment of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, United States.

Funding

Project 4: Effects of cigarette filter ventilation on cigarette appeal and preferences for combusted and noncombusted tobacco productsP01CA217806 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI HATSUKAMI, DOROTHY K, SHIELDS, PETER G. · 2017 to 2022
$12.6M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA217806
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionCigarette brand descriptors such as 'light' are banned in several countries and often replaced by alternative descriptors that continue to mislead smokers about the relative risk from those brands. The objective of this study was to evaluate perceptions from current brand descriptors when presented independently of cigarette packaging.

methodsEighty-eight daily cigarette smokers attended semi-structured interviews at three US research laboratories in 2018-2019 to assess smokers' perceptions of cigarette brand descriptors in four classes of brand features: prestige, connotation, taste, and color. Participants ranked descriptors within each brand feature on perceived harm, attractiveness, and appeal (willingness to try). Ranked perceptions were described using median rankings and percentages. Chi-squared was used to assess demographic effects on perceptions. Spearman's correlation was used to assess the association between harm, attractiveness, and appeal rankings.

resultsBrand descriptors influenced perceptions of harm, attractiveness, and appeal within each brand feature. Smooth was perceived as the most attractive (42.5%) and appealing (33.0%) taste descriptor. Red was perceived as the most harmful (45.4%) and least appealing (22.7%) color descriptor. Perceptions of certain descriptors differed by demographic characteristics such as sex and age. Rankings of attractiveness and appeal were more strongly correlated (r=0.63) than rankings of harm and appeal (r=0.20, p<0.01).

conclusionsCigarette manufacturers replaced banned descriptors with alternative descriptors that continue to influence perceptions of cigarettes. Regulatory agencies should closely evaluate all brand descriptors and consider implications for alternative products with fewer regulations.

Indexed as

brand descriptorscigarettepackagingperceptionstobacco

Identifiers

PMID33575516
PMCPMC7869751

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.