Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34518335›Full record

Observational studyTobacco control2022

Electronic cigarette and smoking paraphernalia point of sale displays: an observational study in England.

Laura A Brocklebank, Anna K M Blackwell, Theresa M Marteau, Katie De-Loyde, Richard W Morris, Thomas Burgoine, Alice Hobson, Minna Ventsel, Marcus R Munafo

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Tobacco control, 2022. 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
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Laura A BrocklebankSchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK l.brocklebank@ucl.ac.uk marcus.munafo@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-5928-3143
Anna K M BlackwellSchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4984-1818
Theresa M MarteauBehaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3025-1129
Katie De-LoydeSchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8672-9710
Richard W MorrisDepartment of Population Health Sciences, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.
Thomas BurgoineUKCRC Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR), MRC Epidemiology Unit, University of Cambridge School of Clinical Medicine, Cambridge, UK.
Alice HobsonBehaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-7030-1106
Minna VentselBehaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8308-9140
Marcus R MunafoSchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK l.brocklebank@ucl.ac.uk marcus.munafo@bristol.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-4049-993X
University of Cambridge · GBUniversity of Bristol · GBAt Bristol · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_UU_00006/7Medical Research Council MR/K023187/1Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust 206853/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTobacco point of sale (POS) retail displays are banned in many countries, including in England, due in part to evidence linking them to greater susceptibility to smoking in children. There is no equivalent ban on displays of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) or smoking paraphernalia (eg, cigarette lighters) in England, which are often positioned alongside covered tobacco storage units. This observational study describes the visibility and placement of e-cigarette and smoking paraphernalia POS displays in major tobacco retailers in two cities in England to inform future research examining their possible links to susceptibility to tobacco smoking, particularly in children.

methodsResearchers visited all small- and large-format stores of four supermarket chains and a randomly selected sample of convenience stores, in Bristol and Cambridge. A standardised checklist was used to create a total visibility score for POS displays of (a) e-cigarettes and (b) smoking paraphernalia, plus other measures of visibility and placement. These were described for the total sample and compared between areas of low, medium, and high deprivation using general linear models adjusting for store location and store type.

resultsThe visibility checklist was completed in 133 of 166 stores (80% completion rate). Both e-cigarette and smoking paraphernalia POS displays were present in 96% of stores. POS displays were highly visible across all stores: mean (SD) total visibility scores, out of 17, were 14.7 (1.8) for e-cigarettes and 12.7 (1.8) for smoking paraphernalia. There was no clear evidence of differences in visibility by area of deprivation.

conclusionE-cigarette and smoking paraphernalia POS displays are near ubiquitous and highly visible in major tobacco retailers in two cities in England. The impact of these displays on tobacco smoking in children and adults is unknown, meriting urgent research to assess their effect on susceptibility to tobacco smoking in children.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsTobacco ProductsAdultChildCommerceHumansMarketingSmokingTobacco Smokingadvertising and promotionelectronic nicotine delivery devicesenvironmentsocioeconomic status

Identifiers

PMID34518335
PMCPMC9726958
OpenAlexW3137349772

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.