Trial reportNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2021
Waterpipe Tobacco Warnings: An Experimental Study Among a Nationally Representative Sample of US Young Adults.
Trial report in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of graphic warning label on acute changes in waterpipe tobacco smoking behavior, biomarkers of exposure and harm, and subjective effects in a randomized trial.Addictive behaviors · 2026Trial
- "Scary and Effective, Definitely Pushes Me to Quit Smoking": Developing Waterpipe Pictorial Health Warnings Targeting Young Adults in Lebanon.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWaterpipe tobacco (WT) smoking by young adults remains high and misperceptions are common. Product warnings can increase knowledge of harms and reduce use. The goal of this study was to test warning statements, including the FDA-required nicotine warning (prior to implementation), on young adults' thinking about harms of and discouragement from WT smoking.
methodsWe conducted a between-subjects experiment in a nationally representative telephone survey of 1152 young adults aged 18-29. Participants were randomly assigned to hear one of five warning statements and reported how much, on a 4-point scale, the warning made them think about the harms and discouraged them from WT smoking.
resultsThe sample was 36.8% female, 57.8% white, 20.2% Black, 24.1% Hispanic, with a mean age of 23.2 (SE = 0.25). Under half (43.5%) had ever smoked WT. There were significant differences among the statements on both thinking about harms (p < .0001) and discouragement (p < .0001). The FDA-required "nicotine" warning led to the lowest thinking about harms (M = 2.85, SE = 0.08) and was the least discouraging (M = 2.86, SE = 0.08), while the "100 cigarettes" warning resulted in the greatest thinking about harms (M = 3.62, SE = 0.05) and was the most discouraging (M = 3.56, SE = 0.06).
conclusionsThe nicotine warning resulted in the lowest levels of thinking about harms and discouragement from WT smoking, suggesting limited impact. However, a warning focused on comparing smoke inhalation from WT smoking to cigarettes seems promising. Warnings should cover a broad range of WT health effects, and possibly comparisons to cigarettes. Findings also have implications for the content of international waterpipe warnings. IMPLICATIONS: This study indicates that the nicotine warning is the least effective at making young adults think about the harms of and discouraging WT smoking. The FDA and other countries should consider requiring warnings to cover a broader range of health harms, misperceptions, and possibly comparisons to cigarettes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.