ArticleNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2022
Reasons for Using Roll-Your-Own Tobacco and Perceptions of Health-Promoting Pack Inserts: A Focus Group Study with Roll-Your-Own Tobacco Smokers in Scotland.
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 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Tobacco package health warnings about product manipulations: an experimental study among Australian adults who smoke.Health promotion international · 2025Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionUse of roll-your-own (RYO) tobacco is increasing in most regions, but few qualitative studies have explored why RYO smokers use this product, and no study has considered their views of health-promoting pack inserts.
methodsEight focus groups were conducted with 18-35-year-old RYO smokers (n = 50) in Greater Glasgow (Scotland) in February-March 2020 to explore reasons for using RYO and perceptions of health-promoting inserts. Participants were shown four inserts adapted from those required in cigarette packs in Canada, with all encouraging quitting, and two RYO-specific inserts explaining that RYO is not less harmful than cigarettes.
resultsLower price, better taste, the pleasure of rolling and ability to customize roll-ups, and the belief that RYO was less harmful than cigarettes were drivers for use. There were mixed perceptions of the extent to which inserts would capture attention if included in RYO packs. The positive messaging used on the Canadian inserts was considered motivational and inspirational, and contrasted with the on-pack warnings. The messaging on the RYO inserts, in comparison, was viewed unfavorably and generally dismissed. Participants, most of whom were not interested in quitting, did not feel that inserts would lead them to change their smoking behavior. However, some felt that the Canadian inserts could be helpful for those thinking about quitting and young people contemplating smoking.
conclusionsInserts with positive messaging about quitting, rather than messaging explicating the harms of RYO, were preferred by RYO smokers. What, if any, RYO-specific messaging resonates with RYO smokers merits further attention. IMPLICATIONS: Aside from price, taste, and the pleasure associated with rolling and ability to individualize roll-ups, the erroneous belief that RYO is less harmful than cigarettes was a key reason for use. While inserts with positive messaging about quitting, as used on the Canadian inserts, were viewed as potentially helpful, inserts that challenged the idea that RYO was not less harmful than cigarettes were generally dismissed. Research is needed to understand what types of RYO-specific messaging could most effectively be used on inserts, or indeed in other media, to challenge the misperceptions that many RYO smokers hold.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.