ArticlePreventive medicine2024
Would banning menthol cigarettes, flavored cigars, and flavored e-cigarettes prompt users to seek illicit channels for obtaining them in the United States?
Article in Preventive medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cooling the Conversation: Discourse About Menthol and Flavored Tobacco Restrictions on TikTok.Substance use & misuse · 2026Article
- Perceptions of a Menthol Cigarette and Flavored Cigar Ban Among Black and White Adults Who Smoke Menthol Cigarettes, United States, 2024.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974) · 2025Article
- A netnographic analysis of online active commentaries on Malaysia's tobacco generation end game.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundBanning flavors in tobacco and nicotine products may reduce youth initiation and prompt quit attempts but such bans may lead to illicit markets. We examined how likely current users would be to seek flavored products from illicit channels under various ban scenarios.
methodsCross-sectional surveys of 2552 current users of menthol cigarettes or flavored cigars and 2347 users of flavored e-cigarettes were conducted between 2021 and 2022 in the United States. For each ban scenario, respondents reported if they would have intentions to seek the banned flavored products from any illicit channels and identified the specific illicit channel they would consider. Logistic regressions were used to estimate how the likelihood of having intentions to seek illicit channels was associated with demographics, ban scenarios, and status of tobacco use.
resultsUnder various ban scenarios, 24-30% of people who smoked said they would seek illicit channels to obtain the banned products compared with 21-41% of dual users and 35-39% of users of flavored e-cigarettes. Online retailers were favored by people who smoked while users of flavored e-cigarettes favored local retailers. Heavy users were more likely to say they would try illicit channels. Under bans restricting more types of flavored tobacco products, users would be less likely to try illegal channels.
conclusionsA significant proportion of users of flavored tobacco and nicotine products would not reject using illicit banned products. Tailored programs are needed to apply to the groups with a higher risk of seeking illicit channels for banned products.
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.