OBJECTIVE: To quantify the effect of exposure on initiation of tobacco use among adolescents. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, PsychINFO, ABI/INFORM, and Business Source Premier through October/November 2005 was conducted. Unpublished studies were solicited from researchers. STUDY SELECTION: Of 401 citations initially identified, 51 (n = 141 949 participants) met the inclusion criteria: reporting on exposure and tobacco use outcomes and participants younger than 18 years. Included studies reported 146 effects; 89 were conceptually independent effects. Data were extracted independently by 3 of us using a standardized tool. Weighted averages were calculated using a linear mixed-effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed. Main Exposures Exposures (tobacco advertising, promotions, and samples and pro-tobacco depictions in films, television, and videos) were categorized as low or high engagement based on the degree of psychological involvement required. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were categorized as cognitive (attitudes or intentions) or behavioral (initiation, tobacco use status, or progression of use). RESULTS: Exposure to pro-tobacco marketing and media increases the odds of youth holding positive attitudes toward tobacco use (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-2.13) and more than doubles the odds of initiating tobacco use (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.79-2.77). Highly engaging marketing and media are more effective at promoting use (odds ratio, 2.67; 95% confidence interval, 2.19-3.25). These effects are observed across time, in different countries, with different study designs and measures of exposure and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Pro-tobacco marketing and media stimulate tobacco use among youth. A ban on all tobacco promotions is warranted to protect children.
OBJECTIVE: To quantify the effect of exposure on initiation of tobacco use among adolescents. DATA SOURCES: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, PsychINFO, ABI/INFORM, and Business Source Premier through October/November 2005 was conducted. Unpublished studies were solicited from researchers. STUDY SELECTION: Of 401 citations initially identified, 51 (n = 141 949 participants) met the inclusion criteria: reporting on exposure and tobacco use outcomes and participants younger than 18 years. Included studies reported 146 effects; 89 were conceptually independent effects. Data were extracted independently by 3 of us using a standardized tool. Weighted averages were calculated using a linear mixed-effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed. Main Exposures Exposures (tobacco advertising, promotions, and samples and pro-tobacco depictions in films, television, and videos) were categorized as low or high engagement based on the degree of psychological involvement required. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes were categorized as cognitive (attitudes or intentions) or behavioral (initiation, tobacco use status, or progression of use). RESULTS: Exposure to pro-tobacco marketing and media increases the odds of youth holding positive attitudes toward tobacco use (odds ratio, 1.51; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-2.13) and more than doubles the odds of initiating tobacco use (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% confidence interval, 1.79-2.77). Highly engaging marketing and media are more effective at promoting use (odds ratio, 2.67; 95% confidence interval, 2.19-3.25). These effects are observed across time, in different countries, with different study designs and measures of exposure and outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Pro-tobacco marketing and media stimulate tobacco use among youth. A ban on all tobacco promotions is warranted to protect children.
Authors: Harry A Lando; Bethany J Hipple; Myra Muramoto; Jonathan D Klein; Alexander V Prokhorov; Deborah J Ossip; Jonathan P Winickoff Journal: Bull World Health Organ Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 9.408
Authors: William G Shadel; Steven C Martino; Amelia Haviland; Claude Setodji; Brian A Primack Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2010-06-24 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: David E Nelson; Paul Mowery; Kat Asman; Linda L Pederson; Patrick M O'Malley; Ann Malarcher; Edward W Maibach; Terry F Pechacek Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2008-04-01 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: James L Klosky; Vida L Tyc; Ashley Hum; Shelly Lensing; Joanna Buscemi; Danette M Garces-Webb; Melissa M Hudson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-12-14 Impact factor: 44.544