Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39900488›Full record

SynthesisTobacco control2026

Cigarette filter ventilation, product appeal and regulatory options: a review of the influence of ventilation on consumers' sensory and risk perceptions.

Vaughan W Rees, Dorothy Hatsukami, Reinskje Talhout

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Tobacco control, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Vaughan W Rees *Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9939-6740
Dorothy HatsukamiDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1108-2609
Reinskje Talhout *Centre for Health Protection, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, Netherlands Reinskje.Talhout@rivm.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-5310-9064

Funding

Project 4: Effects of cigarette filter ventilation on cigarette appeal and preferences for combusted and noncombusted tobacco productsP01CA217806 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA · PI HATSUKAMI, DOROTHY K, SHIELDS, PETER G. · 2017 to 2022
$12.6M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA217806
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveCigarette filter ventilation may enhance product appeal, support initiation and sustained smoking, and increase smoking prevalence. We reviewed recent evidence on how filter ventilation affects consumers' perceptions of product appeal and considered product use preferences to inform regulatory options. DATA SOURCES: PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO databases were searched up to December 2023. Systematic search strategies used terms based on cigarette filter ventilation, and multiple constructs comprising product appeal and user perceptions. STUDY SELECTION: Two reviewers screened all 917 retrieved titles and abstracts independently and applied a consensus strategy to identify 16 articles that met eligibility criteria. DATA EXTRACTION: Extracted data focused on study design, dependent variables or outcomes, and major conclusions. DATA SYNTHESIS: While remaining popular, awareness and risk perception of ventilated cigarettes is generally low. Cigarettes with filter ventilation are perceived as smoother and less irritating than non-ventilated cigarettes. These modified sensory experiences shape perceptions of reduced health risks. Pack text descriptors and colours convey further information to consumers about smoothness, supporting lowered risk perceptions.

conclusionsFilter ventilation and its associated marketing continue to influence consumers' perceptions of smoothness creating misperceptions about health risks. Standardised ('plain') packaging regulations are recommended to restrict communication of ventilation themes as well as evidence-based health communications to correct consumer misperceptions about smoothness and health risks. Since filter ventilation has no benefits for public health, policy makers could consider banning filter ventilation or even disallowing filters.

Indexed as

Consumer BehaviorFiltrationProduct PackagingSmokingTobacco ProductsVentilationHumansPerceptionAddictionAdvertising and PromotionPackaging and LabellingPrevention

Identifiers

PMID39900488
PMCPMC13151510

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.