Search

By law, the US government must publicly display the quantities of harmful chemicals in cigarettes by brand, but doing so could mislead people to incorrectly think that some cigarettes are safer than others. We evaluated formats for presenting chemical quantities side-by-side to see if any were misleading. We recruited US convenience (n = 604) and probability (n = 1440) samples. We randomized participants to 1 of 5 formats: checklist, point estimates, ranges, a visual risk indicator, or no-quantity control. Participants were far more likely to incorrectly endorse one cigarette brand as riskier than the other in the checklist (65% made error), point estimate (67-70%), range (64-67%), or risk indicator (68-75%) conditions as compared to the no-quantity control (1%, all p < .001). Among smokers, erroneous risk perceptions mediated the impact of quantity format on interest in switching brands. People viewing chemical quantities for cigarette brands side-by-side misperceived differences in risk, suggesting limited public health value of this information., Author(s): M. Justin Byron [sup.1] [sup.2] [sup.3] , Allison J. Lazard [sup.4] [sup.3] , Noel T. Brewer [sup.2] [sup.3] Author Affiliations: (1) grid.410711.2, 0000 0001 1034 1720, Department of Family [...]

INTRODUCTION:We reviewed research literature on pro-tobacco marketing and anti-tobacco campaigns targeting eight vulnerable populations to determine key findings and research gaps. Results can inform tobacco policy and control efforts and the design of public education campaigns for these groups. METHODS:Five journal databases in medicine, communication, and science, were used to identify 8875 peer-reviewed, original articles in English, published in the period 2004-2018. There were 144 articles that met inclusion criteria on pro-tobacco marketing or anti-tobacco campaigns aimed at eight US groups: women of reproductive age, racial/ethnic minority groups (African American, Hispanic/Latino, Asian/Pacific Islander and American Indian/Alaska Native), Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender (LGBT) populations, groups with low socioeconomic status, rural/inner city residents, military/veterans, and people with mental health or medical co-morbidities. We summarized the number of articles for each population, type of tobacco, and pro-tobacco or anti-tobacco focus. Narrative summaries were organized by population and by pro-tobacco or anti-tobacco focus, with key strategies and gaps by group. RESULTS:There were more studies on pro-tobacco marketing rather than anti-tobacco campaigns, and on cigarettes rather than other tobacco products. Major gaps included studies on Asian Americans, American Indian/Alaska Natives, pregnant women, LGBT populations, and those with mental health or medical co-morbidities. Gaps related to tobacco products were found for hookah, snus, and pipe/roll-your-own tobacco in the pro-tobacco studies, and for all products except cigarettes in anti-tobacco studies. Common tobacco industry methods used were tailoring of product and package design and messages that were used to reach and appeal to different sociodemographic groups. Studies varied by research design making it difficult to compare results. CONCLUSIONS:We found major research gaps for specific groups and tobacco products. Public education campaigns need a stronger foundation in empirical studies focused on these populations. Research and practice would benefit from studies that permit comparisons across studies.

The article focuses on addressing housing challenges for rural residency programs by exploring various strategies and funding sources to support rural medical education and enhance the recruitment and retention of physicians in rural areas.

Laws and treaties compel countries to inform the public about harmful chemicals (constituents) in cigarette smoke. To encourage relevant research by behavioral scientists, we provide a primer on cigarette smoke toxicology and summarize research on how the public thinks about cigarette smoke chemicals. We systematically searched PubMed in July 2016 and reviewed citations from included articles. Four central findings emerged across 46 articles that met inclusion criteria. First, people were familiar with very few chemicals in cigarette smoke. Second, people knew little about cigarette additives, assumed harmful chemicals are added during manufacturing, and perceived cigarettes without additives to be less harmful. Third, people wanted more information about constituents. Finally, well-presented chemical information increased knowledge and awareness and may change behavior. This research area is in urgent need of behavioral science. Future research should investigate whether educating the public about these chemicals increases risk perceptions and quitting., Author(s): Jennifer C. Morgan [sup.1] [sup.2] , M. Justin Byron [sup.1] [sup.2] , Sabeeh A. Baig [sup.1] [sup.2] , Irina Stepanov [sup.3] , Noel T. Brewer [sup.1] [sup.2] Author Affiliations: [...]

We sought to identify icons to effectively communicate health harms of chemicals in cigarette smoke. Participants were a convenience sample of 701 U.S. adults. A within-subjects online experiment explored the effects of icon semiotic type: symbolic (arbitrary, most abstract), indexical, and iconic (representative, most concrete). Outcomes were perceived representation, affect toward smoking, elaboration, perceived severity, and perceived effectiveness. For not-easy-to-visualize harms of cancer and addiction, symbolic icons received the highest ratings (all p < .001). For easy-to-visualize symptoms of heart attack/stroke, indexical icons received the highest ratings (all p < .001). For easy-to-visualize harm of reproductive organ damage, the iconic image did best (all p < .001). Icon type often had a larger impact among participants with higher health literacy. Symbolic icons may be most effective for health effects not easily visualized. Iconic or indexical icons may be more effective for health effects attributable to specific body parts or symptoms., Author(s): Allison J. Lazard [sup.1] , Annie Schmidt [sup.2] , Huyen Vu [sup.3] , M. Justin Byron [sup.2] [sup.3] , Ellen Peters [sup.4] , Marcella H. Boynton [sup.2] [sup.3] , [...]

Federal law now requires FDA to disseminate information on chemicals in cigarette smoke, but it is unclear how best to do so. In a 2 x 2 between-subjects experiment, participants received a message about chemicals in cigarette smoke (e.g., 'Cigarette smoke has benzene.') along with an additional randomly assigned messaging strategy: a 'found-in' (e.g., 'This is found in gasoline.'), a health effect (e.g., 'This causes heart disease.'), both, or neither. Participants were U.S. probability phone samples of 5000 adults and 1123 adolescents, and an online convenience sample of 4130 adults. Adding a health effect elicited greater discouragement from wanting to smoke cigarettes (all p < .05) as did adding a found-in (all p < .05). However, including both messaging strategies added little or nothing above including just one. These findings can help the FDA and other agencies develop effective and parsimonious messages about cigarette smoke constituents., Author(s): Sabeeh A. Baig [sup.1] , M. Justin Byron [sup.1] [sup.2] , Marcella H. Boynton [sup.1] [sup.2] , Noel T. Brewer [sup.1] [sup.2] , Kurt M. Ribisl [sup.1] [sup.2] Author [...]

Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS PubMed WorldCat 17 Soule EK, Dubray J, Cohen JE, Schwartz R, Chaiton M. Smoking cessation strategies used by former menthol cigarette smokers after a menthol ban. A menthol ban will be an inflection point for menthol users, as millions of menthol smokers each figure out how to adjust to this policy. Google Scholar Crossref Search ADS WorldCat 19 Goodkind N. Big Tobacco could delay Biden's menthol cigarette ban for years. A ban on menthol in combustible tobacco products has the potential to directly and dramatically affect the lives of the 19 million people who smoke menthol cigarettes in the US, including 85% of African American smokers.[1] The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gained authority over flavors in cigarettes in 2009 and was directed by law to form a Tobacco Product Scientific Advisory Committee to review the state of the science on menthol and make a recommendation. [Extracted from the article]

BackgroundSmoking remains one of the most pressing public health problems in the United States and internationally. The concurrent evolution of the Internet, social network science, and online communities offers a potential target for high-yield interventions capable of shifting population-level smoking rates and substantially improving public health. ObjectiveOur objective was to convene leading practitioners in relevant disciplines to develop the core of a strategic research agenda on online social networks and their use for smoking cessation, with implications for other health behaviors. MethodsWe conducted a 100-person, 2-day, multidisciplinary workshop in Washington, DC, USA. Participants worked in small groups to formulate research questions that could move the field forward. Discussions and resulting questions were synthesized by the workshop planning committee. ResultsWe considered 34 questions in four categories (advancing theory, understanding fundamental mechanisms, intervention approaches, and evaluation) to be the most pressing. ConclusionsOnline social networks might facilitate smoking cessation in several ways. Identifying new theories, translating these into functional interventions, and evaluating the results will require a concerted transdisciplinary effort. This report presents a series of research questions to assist researchers, developers, and funders in the process of efficiently moving this field forward.

Introduction: The US Food and Drug Administration has increased communication efforts that aim to raise public awareness of the harmful constituents (ie, chemicals) in cigarette smoke. We sought to investigate whether the public's awareness of these chemicals has increased in light of such efforts.Methods: Participants were national probability samples of 11 322 US adults and adolescents recruited in 2014-2015 (wave 1) and 2016-2017 (wave 2). Cross-sectional telephone surveys assessed awareness of 24 cigarette smoke chemicals at both timepoints.Results: The proportion of US adults aware of cigarette smoke chemicals did not differ between waves 1 and 2 (25% and 26%, p = .19). In contrast, awareness of chemicals among adolescents fell from 28% to 22% (p < .001), mostly due to lower awareness of carbon monoxide, arsenic, benzene, and four other chemicals. Belief that most of the harmful chemicals in cigarette smoke come from burning the cigarette also fell from waves 1 to 2 (adults: 31% vs. 26%; adolescents: 47% vs. 41%, both ps < .05). Participants were more likely to be aware of cigarette smoke chemicals if they had been exposed to anti-smoking campaign advertisements (p < .05) or had previously sought chemical information (p < .05). Cigarette smoke chemical awareness did not differ between smokers and nonsmokers.Conclusion: Awareness of cigarette smoke chemicals remains low and unchanged among adults and decreased somewhat among adolescents. The association of chemical awareness with information exposure via campaigns and information seeking behavior is promising. More concerted communication efforts may be needed to increase public awareness of cigarette smoke chemicals, which could potentially discourage smoking.Implications: Awareness of the toxic chemicals in cigarette smoke may contribute to quitting. The US Food and Drug Administration is making efforts to increase public awareness of these chemicals. Two national surveys (2014-2017) found that chemical awareness was low among adults and adolescents. Although awareness did not change among adults, awareness among adolescents dropped over time. In addition, exposure to anti-smoking campaigns and chemical information seeking behavior were associated with higher awareness of chemicals in cigarette smoke. Campaigns and other efforts may be needed to increase awareness of cigarette smoke chemicals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]