ArticleAmerican journal of health behavior2026
Impact of FDA-approved graphic front-of-package health warnings on attention, package choice, and quit intentions.
Article in American journal of health behavior, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: The FDA has the authority to regulate tobacco products, including the implementation of graphic health warnings on cigarette packaging. This study examines the short-term effects of these front-of-package health warnings on smokers' attention, package preferences, and intentions to quit. Methods: A total of 951 smokers were recruited via Amazon Mechanical Turk. Participants completed an online survey that included demographic questions, measures of attention to warnings, package choice, and quit intention. Participants were randomly assigned to view cigarette packs with or without warnings. Results: First, exposure to warnings increased attention to the warning area (OR = 1.747, p = 0.0109), and increased the likelihood of choosing packages without warnings as prices increased (OR = 18.244, p<0.001). Additionally, focusing on the warning content also made smokers more likely to choose packages without warnings as price increased (OR = 5.025, p<0.001). However, warnings had no significant effect on quit intentions. Conclusions: Warnings effectively capture attention and influence cigarette package preferences, but their impact on quit intentions was not detectable after single exposure. These findings suggest that while warnings may affect short-term purchasing behavior, they are insufficient for driving cessation. Future research should investigate the long-term impact of warnings and consider other factors influencing quitting behavior.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42559320PMC13440363What 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.