ArticleTobacco control2024
Rapid-response surveillance of the first US test market for VLN cigarettes.
Article in Tobacco control, 2024. 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.
- Development and implementation of a rapid surveillance system for tobacco product retail availability in six U.S. sites.Preventive medicine reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionVLN King menthol and non-menthol are the first combustible cigarettes to receive US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorisation as modified risk tobacco products. Focusing on the first retail test market, this study characterised VLN advertising, product placement, discounts and price.
methodsAll Chicago-area Circle K stores (n=133) were telephoned to assess whether they sold VLN. Single-pack price of non-menthol was obtained in 57 of 100 stores that sold VLN. In fall 2022, trained data collectors visited those 57 stores to assess VLN product placement, advertising, discounts and prices. Paired t-tests compared observed VLN price with telephone price and to price of other cigarette brands.
resultsNearly all stores (91.1%) displayed exterior advertisements for VLN, and 41.1% displayed interior advertising, with 8.9% of stores advertising VLN in the power wall but never in the header row. VLN cigarettes were displayed in the power wall exclusively and among high-nicotine cigarettes. Some VLN marketing claims were not FDA-authorised. VLN advertised a sweepstakes offer and rewards programme. Most stores (85.7%) offered VLN discounts. VLN was priced like a premium brand (mean=$10.90, SD=$1.53), and prices obtained by telephone did not differ from observed prices several months later.
conclusionsRetail marketing strategies for VLN mimic those for high-nicotine cigarettes. Deviations from FDA-authorised marketing claims were evident. Surveillance in future test markets is recommended to assess compliance with marketing claims and examine relative price and discount offers. Of interest is how premium-priced, low-nicotine cigarettes stand to compete in a market dominated by cheaper high-nicotine cigarettes.
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.