ArticleBMJ open2021
E-cigarette advertising exposure among South African adults in 2017: findings from a nationally representative cross-sectional survey.
Article in BMJ open, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Sex-stratified analysis of marketing exposure and current e-cigarette use among Saudi adolescents.Frontiers in public health · 2025Article
- E-cigarettes in Nigeria: A scoping review of evidence.Health science reports · 2024Article
- A downstream social norms approach for curtailing e-cigarette waste: Promising social marketing interventions from consumer interactions.Waste management & research : the journal of the International Solid Wastes and Public Cleansing Association, ISWA · 2023Article
- Trends in the use and dual use of factory-made combustible cigarettes, other tobacco products and electronic cigarettes: Results from South African Social Attitudes Surveys during 2007 to 2018.Tobacco induced diseases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectives
settingHousehold-based survey.
participants3063 individuals who participated in the 2017 South African Social Attitudes survey, a nationally representative, in-person survey of the non-institutionalised civilian adult population aged ≥16 years EXPOSURE: 'In the past 12 months, have you seen advertisements or promotions for e-cigarettes (including e-shisha, e-pipe) on any of the following media: newspapers/magazines, billboards, in the malls or any other source?' MAIN OUTCOMES: Beliefs and attitudes regarding e-cigarettes.
findingsParticipants' mean age was 37.7 years. Overall, 20.1% reported exposure to e-cigarette advertisements. By age, exposure was most prevalent among those aged 16-19 years (24.6%). Top sources of exposure among those exposed were stores, 40.7%; malls, 30.9%; and television, 32.5%. Of those aware of e-cigarettes, 61.2% believed 'e-cigarette advertisements and promotion may make adolescents think of smoking traditional cigarettes'; 62.7% believed that 'e-cigarette advertisements and promotions may make ex-smokers think of starting smoking cigarettes again'; and 59.5% supported the statement that 'e-cigarette smoking should be banned indoors just as traditional cigarette smoking'. Notably, teens aged 16-19 reported the lowest prevalence (49.0%) of those believing that 'e-cigarette advertisements and promotion may make adolescents think of smoking traditional cigarettes', whereas this percentage was highest among those aged 55-64 years (73.2%).
conclusionComprehensive regulatory efforts are needed to address e-cigarette advertising, marketing and sponsorship in order to protect public health. The urgent enactment of the new tobacco control legislation, The Control of Tobacco Products and Electronic Delivery Systems Bill, can help reduce youth exposure to e-cigarette advertising in South Africa.
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.