Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42384953›Full record

ArticleNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2026

Where are cigarettes cheaper? Area-level and store-type differences in price in US cities.

Nina C Schleicher, Trent O Johnson, Shyanika W Rose, Yuhan Liu, Judy Van de Venne, Judith J Prochaska, Lisa Henriksen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2026. 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

7 authors.

Nina C SchleicherStanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, 3180 Porter Drive, Suite 125 Palo Alto, California, US 94304.ORCID 0000-0002-6076-5713
Trent O JohnsonStanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, 3180 Porter Drive, Suite 125 Palo Alto, California, US 94304.ORCID 0000-0001-7022-0242
Shyanika W RoseCenter for Health, Engagement, and Transformation, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Suite 460 Healthy Kentucky Research Building 760 Press Avenue Lexington, KY, US 40536-0679.ORCID 0000-0002-4200-1197
Yuhan LiuQuantitative Sciences Unit, Stanford University School of Medicine, 3180 Porter Drive Palo Alto, CA, US 94304.
Judy Van de VenneCenter for Health, Engagement, and Transformation, College of Medicine, University of Kentucky, Suite 460 Healthy Kentucky Research Building 760 Press Avenue Lexington, KY, US 40536-0679.
Judith J ProchaskaStanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, 3180 Porter Drive, Suite 125 Palo Alto, California, US 94304.ORCID 0000-0001-7925-326X
Lisa HenriksenStanford Prevention Research Center, Stanford University School of Medicine, 3180 Porter Drive, Suite 125 Palo Alto, California, US 94304.ORCID 0000-0002-9288-3562

Funding

Project 3: Tobacco Town Policy ModelingP01CA225597 · NCI · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI HENRIKSEN, LISA ANNE, LUKE, DOUGLAS A · 2018 to 2023
$11.5M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA225597
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPrevious studies examined area-level differences in menthol and non-menthol cigarette prices, finding cigarettes tend to cost less in neighborhoods with lower household income, higher percentage of youth, and higher percentage of Black residents. Previous studies of store-type differences in cigarette price found lower prices in pharmacies compared to convenience stores. In a representative sample of urban cigarette retailers, this study examined differences in advertised cigarette prices by store type and neighborhood demographics.

methodsIn a random sample of 1489 cigarette retailers in 26 US cities, data collectors recorded five single-pack prices: Marlboro Red and menthol (Philip Morris USA), Newport menthol and Camel Crush (RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company), and cheapest pack regardless of brand (June-August, 2022). General Estimation Equations tested differences in cigarette price (including taxes) by store type and store-neighborhood demographics.

resultsPharmacies sold premium cigarette brands at lower prices than all other store types, except for Newport menthol in tobacco specialty shops. Associations of price with neighborhood demographics varied by manufacturer. Marlboro (Philip Morris) prices decreased as the percentage of youth in neighborhoods increased. Newport menthol and Camel Crush (RJ Reynolds) prices decreased as percentage of minoritized population increased. Price of cheapest pack decreased as the percentage of youth increased.

conclusionsPharmacies were the cheapest retail source for cigarettes. With the caveat that this study is cross-sectional and observational, area-level differences in cigarette price were consistent with tobacco industry documents about marketing to youth and to racial/ethnic subgroups. Laws mandating tobacco-free pharmacies and minimum prices are recommended.

Identifiers

PMID42384953
PMCPMC13690411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.