Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34270729›Full record

ArticleNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2022

Reappraising Choice in Addiction: Novel Conceptualizations and Treatments for Tobacco Use Disorder.

Amanda M Palmer, Benjamin A Toll, Matthew J Carpenter, Eric C Donny, Dorothy K Hatsukami, Alana M Rojewski, Tracy T Smith, Mehmet Sofuoglu, Johannes Thrul, Neal L Benowitz

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. 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

10 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.

Amanda M PalmerDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-5833-034X
Benjamin A TollDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7978-8416
Matthew J CarpenterDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Eric C DonnyDepartment of Physiology and Pharmacology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-3288-9652
Dorothy K HatsukamiMasonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1108-2609
Alana M RojewskiDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-1531-9287
Tracy T SmithDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA.
Mehmet SofuogluDepartment of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
Johannes ThrulDepartment of Mental Health, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8929-9579
Neal L BenowitzClinical Pharmacology Research Program, Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2041-8124
Medical University of South Carolina · USJohns Hopkins University · USUniversity of California, San Francisco · USUniversity of Minnesota Medical Center · USWake Forest University · USYale University · US

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
Translational Science Laboratory Shared ResourceP30CA138313 · NCI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI John J Lemasters · 2009 to 2026
$42.7M
Pulmonary Focused Foundations in Innovation and Scholarship (PuFFInS)T32HL144470 · NHLBI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI Carol A. Feghali-Bostwick · 2019 to 2026
$2.6M
Scleroderma Twin Study and analysis of Estrogen in patients with dcSScK24AR060297 · NIAMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI FEGHALI-BOSTWICK, CAROL A. · 2013 to 2025
$1.4M
Impact of e-cigarette characteristics on reinforcement and tobacco use patterns among current smokersK01DA047433 · NIDA · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI SMITH, TRACY TAYLOR · 2019 to 2023
$988k
Tobacco Treatment in the Context of Lung Cancer Screening - Administrative SupplementK07CA214839 · NCI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI ROJEWSKI, ALANA · 2017 to 2021
$911k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863NCI NIH HHS K07 CA214839NCI NIH HHS P30 CA138313NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL144470NIAMS NIH HHS K24 AR060297NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA047433
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The introduction of alternative nicotine and tobacco products (such as e-cigarettes, heat-not-burn devices, nicotine pouches) warrants an updated framework from which to conceptualize tobacco use disorder (TUD). The following review provides considerations for TUD within the context of novel products. Historically, the tobacco industry falsely claimed that cigarettes were not addictive or harmful and that those who smoked simply chose to do so. This generated an inaccurate lay perception that smoking is a free or informed choice. Research on nicotine pharmacology demonstrates the powerful addictive potential of nicotine, which is shaped by dose, speed of delivery, and other constituents generated. In addition, non-pharmacologic reinforcers motivate and maintain tobacco use behaviors for both traditional cigarettes and novel products. The negative consequences of combustible tobacco use are well known; however, these outcomes may differ for alternative products. Strategies used for combustible product cessation may be adapted for novel products, and treatment recommendations for TUD should be made within the context of a harm reduction framework wherein alternative product use may be the desired outcome. Providers must therefore be willing to modify their perceptions of products and treatment recommendations accordingly. Better public health outcomes are accomplished through promotion of abstinence from combustible smoking. For those who cannot wean from nicotine entirely, switching to less risky modes of delivery might be a secondary goal, with an eventual aim of stopping use of the alternative product. Implications: Given the advent of novel, alternative tobacco products, tobacco use disorder (TUD) must be conceptualized within a contemporary framework that includes harm reduction and alternative outcomes. The unique contributions of nicotine pharmacology, non-pharmacologic reinforcers, and consequences of use can be used to inform treatments for TUD with the ultimate goal of improving the health of individuals who use tobacco.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsTobacco ProductsTobacco Use DisorderHumansTobacco Use Cessation Devices

Identifiers

PMID34270729
PMCPMC8666123
OpenAlexW3177827696

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.