Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34063735›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Australian Smokers' Sensory Experiences and Beliefs Associated with Menthol and Non-Menthol Cigarettes.

Serafino Mancuso, Emily Brennan, Kimberley Dunstone, Amanda Vittiglia, Sarah Durkin, James F Thrasher, Janet Hoek, Melanie Wakefield

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 50% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Serafino MancusoCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.
Emily BrennanCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9779-0210
Kimberley DunstoneCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5362-2805
Amanda VittigliaCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-1603-3478
Sarah DurkinCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2795-6454
James F ThrasherDepartment of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC 29208, USA.
Janet HoekDepartment of Public Health, University of Otago, Wellington 6140, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-4362-1539
Melanie WakefieldCentre for Behavioural Research in Cancer, Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, VIC 3004, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6183-5699
Cancer Council Victoria · AUUniversity of Otago · NZUniversity of South Carolina · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many current smokers incorrectly believe that menthol cigarettes are less harmful, likely due to the biological and sensory effects of menthol, which can lead smokers to have favourable sensory experiences. In this study, we measured the extent to which Australian smokers associate certain sensory experiences with smoking menthol and non-menthol cigarettes, and their beliefs about how damaging and enjoyable they find cigarettes with each of these sensory experiences. A sample of 999 Australian 18-69-year-old weekly smokers was recruited from a non-probability online panel; this study focuses on the 245 respondents who currently smoked menthol cigarettes at least once per week. Current menthol smokers were four to nine times more likely to experience menthol rather than non-menthol cigarettes as having favourable sensory experiences, including feeling smooth, being soothing on the throat, fresh-tasting and clean-feeling. Menthol smokers perceived cigarettes with these favourable sensations as less damaging and more enjoyable than cigarettes with the opposite more aversive sensory experience. Efforts to correct these misperceptions about risk will likely require messages that provide new information to help smokers understand that these sensations do not indicate a lower level of risk. Banning menthol in tobacco products-as has recently been done in some nations-would also be a timely and justified strategy for protecting consumers.

Indexed as

MentholTobacco ProductsAdolescentAdultAgedAustraliaHumansMiddle AgedSmokersSmokingYoung AdultMentholharm perceptionsmentholmenthol banpublic policysensory experiencestobacco products

Identifiers

PMID34063735
PMCPMC8196669
OpenAlexW3163258581

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.