Literature DB >> 14577983

Switching to lower tar cigarettes does not increase or decrease the likelihood of future quit attempts or cessation.

Andrew Hyland1, John R Hughes, Matthew Farrelly, K Michael Cummings.   

Abstract

This study examined whether switching to low-tar cigarettes predicts future quit attempts or smoking cessation. Prior studies of whether switching to low-tar cigarettes increases or decreases cessation behavior have produced contradictory results. We believed a large, prospective population-based study was needed. Participants in the Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation (COMMIT), who were smokers in 1989 and 1991 and provided their smoking status in a 1993 interview, provided product code information so that the tar categories of their cigarettes could be identified. Smokers' brands were classified as ultralight (0-6 mg tar), light (7-15 mg tar), and regular (16+ mg tar). The main predictor measure was switching to a lower tar yield category: 8% of baseline light smokers and 19% of baseline regular smokers switched to a lower yield product between 1989 and 1991. The main outcome measures were attempts to quit and successful 6-month cessation. Despite greater desire to quit among switchers, switching down was not associated with increased or decreased number of attempts to quit or the likelihood of future cessation. No evidence of differential effects was found for subgroups of smokers, including those who did and did not believe that low-tar cigarettes are safer. The data show that switching to a low-tar cigarette does not appear to increase or decrease the likelihood of future cessation, though motivation to stop smoking may be associated with switching.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14577983     DOI: 10.1080/1462220031000158663

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res        ISSN: 1462-2203            Impact factor:   4.244


  8 in total

1.  Cessation among smokers of "light" cigarettes: results from the 2000 national health interview survey.

Authors:  Hilary A Tindle; Nancy A Rigotti; Roger B Davis; Elizabeth M Barbeau; Ichiro Kawachi; Saul Shiffman
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2006-06-29       Impact factor: 9.308

2.  Factors associated with successful smoking cessation in the United States, 2000.

Authors:  Chung-won Lee; Jennifer Kahende
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2007-06-28       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Environmental Smoking Restrictions and Light Cigarette Adoption Among Chinese Urban Smokers.

Authors:  Tingzhong Yang; Shuhan Jiang; John L Oliffe; Xueying Feng; Jianzhong Zheng
Journal:  Prev Sci       Date:  2015-08

4.  Beliefs about the relative harm of "light" and "low tar" cigarettes: findings from the International Tobacco Control (ITC) China Survey.

Authors:  T Elton-Marshall; G T Fong; M P Zanna; Y Jiang; D Hammond; R J O'Connor; H-H Yong; L Li; B King; Q Li; R Borland; K M Cummings; P Driezen
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 7.552

Review 5.  False promises: the tobacco industry, "low tar" cigarettes, and older smokers.

Authors:  Janine K Cataldo; Ruth E Malone
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2008-08-04       Impact factor: 5.562

6.  Switching to "lighter" cigarettes and quitting smoking.

Authors:  H A Tindle; S Shiffman; A M Hartman; J E Bost
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2009-11-04       Impact factor: 7.552

7.  Quitting activity and tobacco brand switching: findings from the ITC-4 Country Survey.

Authors:  Genevieve A Cowie; Elena Swift; Timea Partos; Ron Borland
Journal:  Aust N Z J Public Health       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 2.939

8.  Misperceptions of "light" cigarettes abound: national survey data.

Authors:  Nick Wilson; Deepa Weerasekera; Jo Peace; Richard Edwards; George Thomson; Miranda Devlin
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2009-05-08       Impact factor: 3.295

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.