Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34620718›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2021

Responses to reduced nicotine cigarette marketing features: a systematic review.

Andrea C Johnson, Melissa Mercincavage, Valentina Souprountchouk, Sasha Rogelberg, Anupreet K Sidhu, Cristine D Delnevo, Andrew A Strasser

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco control, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Assessing Attention to Tobacco Warnings With a Heatmapping Task.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023
    Article
  4. 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

7 authors.

Andrea C JohnsonDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA andrea.johnson1@pennmedicine.upenn.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6470-8927
Melissa MercincavageDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Valentina SouprountchoukDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Sasha RogelbergDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Anupreet K SidhuDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
Cristine D DelnevoUniversity of Pennsylvania-Rutgers University Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9597-4307
Andrew A StrasserDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

Funding

Tobacco Industry Marketing CoreU54CA229973 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI DELNEVO, CRISTINE D · 2018 to 2022
$18.8M
Laboratory-based Approaches to Understanding the Impact of Low Nicotine Content Cigarette Marketing on Young AdultsK07CA218366 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI MERCINCAVAGE, MELISSA · 2018 to 2022
$767k
NCI NIH HHS K07 CA218366NCI NIH HHS U54 CA229973
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo systematically review the literature regarding responses to commercial and public health marketing features for reduced nicotine cigarettes (RNCs) to anticipate potential industry and regulatory actions should an RNC product standard be issued. DATA SOURCES: We searched PubMed for English-language articles using several keywords for reduced nicotine products, cigarettes and marketing features published through 2020. STUDY SELECTION: Of 4092 records, 26 studies were retained for review that met criteria focusing on responses to RNC marketing features. DATA EXTRACTION: Search terms created by the research team were used for review and included independent extraction and coding by two reviewers. Coding was categorised using study design terminology, commercial and public health features in tobacco regulatory science, and their association with individual responses outlined by several message processing outcomes. DATA SYNTHESIS: Most studies focused on current cigarette smokers and were cross-sectional. Reactions to RNCs and attitudes and beliefs were the most common outcomes measured. For commercial features, articles generally studied RNC advertisements, products and/or descriptors. For public health features, articles studied counter-messaging (eg, warning labels) or general descriptors about nicotine or a reduced nicotine product standard. Commercial features were generally associated with favourable responses. Public health features offset favourable responses across most outcomes, though their efficacy was mixed. Contrasts in results by smoking status are discussed.

conclusionsCommercial marketing of RNCs is appealing and may need stronger regulations or communication campaigns to accurately convey risks. Opportunities exist for future research within tobacco regulatory science.

Indexed as

addictionadvertising and promotionnicotinepackaging and labellingpublic policy

Identifiers

PMID34620718
PMCPMC8986886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.