Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34948597›Full record

Trial reportInternational journal of environmental research and public health2021

Optimizing Images for an E-Cigarette Messaging Campaign: Liking and Perceived Effectiveness.

Elise M Stevens, Brittney Keller-Hamilton, Darren Mays, Jennifer B Unger, Olivia A Wackowski, Julia C West, Andrea C Villanti

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. 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.

Elise M StevensDepartment of Population and Quantitative Health Sciences, Division of Preventative and Behavioral Medicine, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA 01605, USA.
Brittney Keller-HamiltonCenter for Tobacco Research, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43214, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-8574-7263
Darren MaysCenter for Tobacco Research, The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43214, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6605-0743
Jennifer B UngerDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90032, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9064-6603
Olivia A WackowskiCenter for Tobacco Studies, Department of Health Behavior, Society and Policy, Rutgers School of Public Health, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ 08854, USA.
Julia C WestDepartment of Psychological Science, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405, USA.
Andrea C VillantiVermont Center on Behavior and Health, Department of Psychiatry, University of Vermont, Burlington, VT 05405, USA.

Funding

USC Tobacco Center of Regulatory ScienceU54CA180905 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Jessica Louise Barrington-Trimis, Adam Matthew Leventhal · 2018 to 2026
$39.0M
University of Vermont Tobacco Center of Regulatory ScienceU54DA036114 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT & ST AGRIC COLLEGE · PI HIGGINS, STEPHEN T · 2018 to 2022
$19.4M
Tobacco Industry Marketing CoreU54CA229973 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI STRASSER, ANDREW A · 2018 to 2022
$18.8M
Young Adults Responses to E-Cigarette Advertisement Features and the Effects of Restricting Features on Tobacco UseR00DA046563 · NIDA · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI STEVENS, ELISE MARIE · 2021 to 2023
$914k
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA180905NCI NIH HHS U54 CA229973NIDA NIH HHS R00 DA046563NIDA NIH HHS R00DA046563NIDA NIH HHS U54 DA036114
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionGiven the prevalence of electronic vapor product (EVP) use among young people in the US, there is a need for effective vaping education campaigns. This study tested 32 images for liking and perceived effectiveness (PE) to identify optimal images for a messaging campaign.

methodImages were selected from current campaigns, warning labels, and other images based on young adult reasons for use. Images were coded for the presence of (1) people, (2) vapor, (3) device, (4) color, and (5) similarity to warning label image. Young adults (

resultsImages containing vapor and/or a device or e-liquid were not well-liked but were perceived as effective in discouraging vaping (ps < 0.05). Images from warning labels were also not well-liked but were perceived as significantly more effective than those not from a warning ( DISCUSSION: Images with specific features were rated as less likable but rated as higher on PE. However, the consistency of image features rated as effective by EVP users and non-users supports the utility of similar imagery for vaping prevention and reduction efforts.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsVapingAdolescentEmotionsHumansYoung Adultelectronic vapor productshealth communicationmessage testing

Identifiers

PMID34948597
PMCPMC8700893

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.