Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38470468›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2024

Effects of a Social Media Intervention on Vaping Intentions: Randomized Dose-Response Experiment.

William Douglas Evans, Jeffrey Bingenheimer, Jennifer Cantrell, Jennifer Kreslake, Shreya Tulsiani, Megumi Ichimiya, Alexander P D'Esterre, Raquel Gerard, Madeline Martin, Elizabeth C Hair

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT04867668 (Digital Media for Cancer Control), which is not on this map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing 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.

NCT04867668 nacompletednot on this map

Digital Media for Cancer Control: Randomized Controlled Trial and Dose-Response Effects

TypeinterventionalSponsorGeorge Washington UniversityRan2021 to 2026Enrolled2,800ConditionsTobacco UseArmsAnti-vaping and anti-smoking digital advertising
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

10 authors.

William Douglas EvansMilken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7559-1592
Jeffrey BingenheimerMilken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-1427-0402
Jennifer CantrellNew York University School of Global Public Health, New York, NY, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-4730-2535
Jennifer KreslakeTruth Initiative, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6605-1327
Shreya TulsianiTruth Initiative, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6986-7858
Megumi IchimiyaMilken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2665-6513
Alexander P D'EsterreTruth Initiative, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-5722-6719
Raquel GerardMilken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2391-0619
Madeline MartinMilken Institute School of Public Health, The George Washington University, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0009-0005-1690-712X
Elizabeth C HairTruth Initiative, Washington, DC, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0536-2409

Funding

Digital Media for Cancer Control: Randomized Controlled Trial and Dose Response EffectsR01CA253013 · NCI · GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI EVANS, W. DOUGLAS · 2020 to 2024
$3.1M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA253013
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgrounde-Cigarette use, especially by young adults, is at unacceptably high levels and represents a public health risk factor. Digital media are increasingly being used to deliver antivaping campaigns, but little is known about their effectiveness or the dose-response effects of content delivery.

objectiveThe objectives of this study were to evaluate (1) the effectiveness of a 60-day antivaping social media intervention in changing vaping use intentions and beliefs related to the stimulus content and (2) the dose-response effects of varying levels of exposure to the intervention on vaping outcomes, including anti-industry beliefs, vaping intentions, and other attitudes and beliefs related to vaping.

methodsParticipants were adults aged 18 to 24 years in the United States. They were recruited into the study through Facebook (Meta Platforms) and Instagram (Meta Platforms), completed a baseline survey, and then randomized to 1 of the 5 conditions: 0 (control), 4, 8, 16, and 32 exposures over a 15-day period between each survey wave. Follow-up data were collected 30 and 60 days after randomization. We conducted stratified analyses of the full sample and in subsamples defined by the baseline vaping status (never, former, and current). Stimulus was delivered through Facebook and Instagram in four 15-second social media videos focused on anti-industry beliefs about vaping. The main outcome measures reported in this study were self-reported exposure to social media intervention content, attitudes and beliefs about vaping, and vaping intentions. We estimated a series of multivariate linear regressions in Stata 17 (StataCorp). To capture the dose-response effect, we assigned each study arm a numerical value corresponding to the number of advertisements (exposures) delivered to participants in each arm and used this number as our focal independent variable. In each model, the predictor was the treatment arm to which each participant was assigned.

resultsThe baseline sample consisted of 1491 participants, and the final analysis sample consisted of 57.28% (854/1491) of the participants retained at the 60-day follow-up. We compared the retained participants with those lost to follow-up and found no statistically significant differences across demographic variables. We found a significant effect of the social media treatment on vaping intentions (β=-0.138, 95% CI -0.266 to -0.010; P=.04) and anti-industry beliefs (β=-0.122, 95% CI 0.008-0.237; P=.04) targeted by the intervention content among current vapers but not among the full sample or other strata. We found no significant effects of self-reported exposure to the stimulus.

conclusionsSocial media interventions are a promising approach to preventing vaping among young adults. More research is needed on how to optimize the dosage of such interventions and the extent to which long-term exposure may affect vaping use over time.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT04867668; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04867668.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsSocial MediaVapingHumansIntentionInternetSelf ReportYoung Adultdose-response effectse-cigarettesnicotinerandomized controlled trialsocial mediatobacco controlvaping

Identifiers

PMID38470468
PMCPMC10966440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.