ReviewHealth promotion international2026
Dissuasive measures on tobacco products: a rapid review of global evidence.
Review in Health promotion international, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
New and innovative measures are needed to combat tobacco industry marketing strategies and reduce the harm caused by tobacco products. This rapid review aimed to identify and synthesize global evidence relating to dissuasive tobacco product measures, defined as unappealing colours and/or messages directly applied to individual tobacco products to discourage uptake and motivate cessation. Scopus, PubMed, Ovid, and Google were systematically searched from January 2000 to September 2024 to capture all published evidence relating to dissuasive measures, regardless of study design and tobacco product investigated. 'Forward' and 'backward' citation searching was also conducted. Studies were assessed for quality using JBI critical appraisal tools. Forty-seven eligible publications from 6011 titles/abstracts were included, all relating to conventional cigarettes: 37 peer-reviewed journal articles, including 2 reviews, 29 empirical studies (19 quantitative, 9 qualitative, 1 mixed-methods) and 6 commentaries, 8 government publications, 1 market research report and 1 doctoral thesis. Evidence largely related to perceptions of dissuasive products and their likely impacts. No empirical evidence regarding the relation of dissuasive measures to tobacco control outcomes was located. When compared with standard cigarettes, darker coloured cigarettes-often brown and green-were perceived to be less appealing, whilst cigarettes with messages related to the impact of smoking on finances, others, mortality, and life expectancy were viewed as novel and effective, and capable of inciting behavioural change. The available evidence is generally supportive of dissuasive cigarettes as a tobacco control measure, although a lack of empirical evidence on tobacco control outcomes limits the findings.
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.