SynthesisTobacco control2026
Cigarette filter ventilation, product appeal and regulatory options: a review of the influence of ventilation on consumers' sensory and risk perceptions.
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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effects of unventilated versus ventilated filtered cigarettes on smoking behaviour and biomarkers of smoke exposure in a randomised clinical trial.Tobacco control · 2026Article
- Effect of Cigarette Type and Smoking Behavior on Urinary Metabolite Levels of Tobacco-Associated Toxicants.Chemical research in toxicology · 2026Article
- Attractiveness and determinants of different tobacco products among Chinese smokers and non-smokers: a web-based cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 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
3 authors.
Funding
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
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.