Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35143678›Full record

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

Tobacco Couponing: A Systematic Review of Exposures and Effects on Tobacco Initiation and Cessation.

Alex C Liber, Luz María Sánchez-Romero, Christopher J Cadham, Zhe Yuan, Yameng Li, Hayoung Oh, Steven Cook, Kenneth E Warner, Lisa Henriksen, Ritesh Mistry and 3 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis 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 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors.

Alex C LiberDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7863-3906
Luz María Sánchez-RomeroDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-7951-3965
Christopher J CadhamDepartment of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Zhe YuanDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Washington, DC, USA.
Yameng LiDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Washington, DC, USA.
Hayoung OhDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Steven CookDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Kenneth E WarnerDepartment of Health Management and Policy, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Lisa HenriksenDepartment of Oncology, Stanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9288-3562
Ritesh MistryDepartment of Health Behavior and Health Education, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Rafael MezaDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1076-5037
Nancy L FleischerDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4371-9133
David T LevyDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University-Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cancer Prevention and Control Program, Washington, DC, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5280-3612

Funding

Research Project 3: Modeling the Impact of Tobacco Control Policies on Polytobacco Use and Associated Health DisparitiesU54CA229974 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN AT ANN ARBOR · PI David Mendez Emilien · 2018 to 2026
$39.2M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA229974
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTobacco couponing continues to be part of contemporary tobacco marketing in the United States. We performed a systematic review of the evidence of tobacco product coupon receipt and redemption to inform regulation. AIMS AND

methodsWe searched EMBASE OVID and Medline databases for observational (cross-sectional and longitudinal) studies that examined the prevalence of tobacco coupon receipt and coupon redemption across different subpopulations, as well as studies of the association between coupon receipt and redemption with tobacco initiation and cessation at follow-up. We extracted unadjusted and adjusted odds ratios for the associations between coupon exposure (receipt, redemption) and tobacco use outcomes (initiation, cessation) and assessed each studies' potential risk of bias.

resultsTwenty-seven studies met the criteria for inclusion. Of 60 observations extracted, 37 measured coupon receipt, nine measured coupon redemption, eight assessed tobacco use initiation, and six assessed cessation. Tobacco product coupon receipt and redemption tended to be more prevalent among younger adults, women, lower education individuals, members of sexual and gender minorities, and more frequent tobacco users. Coupon receipt at baseline was associated with greater initiation. Coupon receipt and redemption at baseline were associated with lower cessation at follow-up among tobacco users. Results in high-quality studies did not generally differ from all studies.

conclusionsTobacco product coupon receipt and redemption are often more prevalent among price-sensitive subpopulations. Most concerning, our results suggest coupon receipt may be associated with higher tobacco initiation and lower tobacco cessation. Couponing thereby increases the toll of tobacco use and could prove to be a viable public health policy intervention point. IMPLICATIONS: A systematic review was conducted of the scientific literature about the receipt, redemption, and effects on tobacco initiation and cessation of tobacco product couponing. This review found that tobacco coupons are more often received by price-sensitive persons and these coupons serve to increase tobacco initiation and decrease tobacco cessation. Policy efforts to address these consequences may help curb tobacco's harms and address health inequities.

Indexed as

Tobacco ProductsAdultCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansSmokingTobacco UseUnited States

Identifiers

PMID35143678
PMCPMC9575981

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.