Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35060607›Full record

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

Public Support for Cigarette Pack Pictorial Health Warnings Among US Adults: A Cross-sectional Analysis of the 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey.

Annette R Kaufman, Heather D'Angelo, Anna Gaysynsky, Andrew B Seidenberg, Robert E Vollinger, Kelly D Blake

Open access · greenAbstract 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 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 40% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Annette R KaufmanTobacco Control Research Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6696-7025
Heather D'AngeloHealth Communication and Informatics Research Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
Anna GaysynskyHealth Communication and Informatics Research Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5612-5572
Andrew B SeidenbergBehavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5001-2067
Robert E VollingerPolicy, Planning and Coordination Unit, Office on Smoking and Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Washington, DC, USA.
Kelly D BlakeHealth Communication and Informatics Research Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD, USA.
National Cancer Institute · USCenters for Disease Control and Prevention · US

Funding

NCI NIH HHS HHSN261201000028CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261201200008CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261201200008INCI NIH HHS HHSN261201200028CNCI NIH HHS HHSN261201200028I
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe US Food and Drug Administration issued a final rule requiring new warnings for cigarette packages and advertisements. This study examines population-level characteristics of support for-versus neutrality or opposition toward-cigarette pack warnings that use text and images to portray the negative health effects of smoking.

methodsWe used nationally representative cross-sectional data of US adults age 18 and older from the 2020 Health Information National Trends Survey (n = 3865). Frequencies and weighted proportions were calculated for neutrality toward, opposition to, and support for pictorial warnings across sociodemographics and other predictors. Weighted, multivariable logistic regression examined predictors of being neutral or opposed versus supportive of pictorial warnings.

resultsIn 2020, an estimated 69.9% of US adults supported pictorial warnings, 9.1% opposed, and 20.9% neither supported nor opposed them. In fully adjusted models, current smokers had almost twice the odds of being neutral or opposed to pictorial warnings as never smokers (odds ratio [OR] = 1.99, confidence interval [CI] 1.12, 3.52). Adults 75 years and older (vs. 18-34) (OR = 0.55, CI 0.33, 0.94) and those with children under 18 in their household (vs. no children) (OR = 0.67, CI 0.46, 0.98) were less likely to be neutral or opposed.

conclusionsIn advance of the Food and Drug Administration's implementation of pictorial warnings on cigarette packages, nearly 70% of American adults support this policy. Disseminating information about the effectiveness of pictorial warnings may further strengthen support among current smokers who are less supportive than never smokers. Furthermore, framing messages around the benefits of pictorial warnings for protecting youth may increase public support. IMPLICATIONS: While public support for pictorial warnings on cigarette packages is high in the United States, it may increase further after policy implementation and be strengthened by utilizing information campaigns that convey the evidence that pictorial warnings are an effective public health strategy.

Indexed as

Smoking CessationTobacco ProductsAdolescentAdultChildCross-Sectional StudiesHumansProduct LabelingSmokingSmoking PreventionUnited States

Identifiers

PMID35060607
PMCPMC9048883
OpenAlexW4206062065

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.