Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40934634›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2025

Message Evaluation Equivalence in Pre Versus Postproduction Tobacco Education Ads.

Emily B Peterson, Matthew E Eggers, Emily C Sanders, Anh Nguyen Zarndt, Emily McDonald, Xiaoquan Zhao, James M Nonnemaker, Nicole B Swires, Margaret G Moakley

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

9 authors.

Emily B PetersonCenter for Tobacco Products, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland. Electronic address: Emily.Peterson@fda.hhs.gov.
Matthew E EggersRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Emily C SandersCenter for Tobacco Products, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Anh Nguyen ZarndtCenter for Tobacco Products, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Emily McDonaldCenter for Tobacco Products, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland.
Xiaoquan ZhaoCenter for Tobacco Products, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Silver Spring, Maryland; Department of Communication, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.
James M NonnemakerRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Nicole B SwiresRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.
Margaret G MoakleyRTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina.

Funding

Intramural FDA HHS FD999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe U.S. Food and Drug Administration's The Real Cost campaigns inform the public about the harms of tobacco use. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has followed a 2-part approach to advertise formative testing to ensure sufficient audience receptivity: preproduction qualitative testing and postproduction quantitative testing. This process provides safeguards for ad performance but course corrections to message selection or development after the ads are already fully produced can be time and resource intensive. This study assesses equivalence in message evaluations between pre and postproduction campaign ads.

methodsData were collected in 2023 from an online panel survey of 804 youth aged 13-17 years, who currently use or are susceptible to use E-cigarettes or cigarettes. Participants were randomly assigned to a set of 4 preproduction or postproduction The Real Cost campaign ads. Participants completed a series of message evaluation measures after each ad. Authors tested for equivalence of mean message evaluation scores between the pre and postproduction versions of each ad using 2 one-sided t-tests and estimated concordance correlation coefficients. Data were analyzed in 2024.

resultsAggregate ad performance scores between pre and postproduction versions were equivalent. Patterns varied for individual ads, with most demonstrating equivalence on some but not all message evaluation measures. Concordance correlation coefficients for pre and postproduction ads were positive and moderate in size.

conclusionsResults suggest that message evaluation assessments of preproduction ads are likely a good indicator of message evaluation assessments for postproduction ads. Public health practitioners may consider incorporating quantitative copy testing earlier in the formative testing process to identify the most promising ad concepts.

Identifiers

PMID40934634
PMCPMC12435918

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.