Jamie Guillory1, Nadra Lisha2, Youn Ok Lee1, Pamela M Ling2. 1. RTI International, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA. 2. Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To explore the prevalence and sociodemographic makeup of smokers who do not self-identify as smokers (ie, phantom smokers) compared with self-identifying smokers in a sample of bar-going young adults aged 18-30 years to more accurately assess young adult prevalence of smoking and inform cessation message targeting. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys of smokers (n=3089) were conducted in randomly selected bars/nightclubs in seven US cities. Logistic regression models assessed associations between phantom smoking (past 30-day smoking and denial of being a smoker), tobacco and alcohol use behaviours (eg, social smoking, nicotine dependence, smoking while drinking, past 30-day alcohol use) and demographics. RESULTS: Compared with smokers, phantom smokers were more likely to be college graduates (OR=1.43, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.98) and to identify themselves as social smokers (OR=1.60, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.12). Phantom smokers had lower odds of smoking while drinking (OR=0.28, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.32), being nicotine dependent (OR=0.36, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.76) and having quit for at least 1 day in the last year (OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.69) compared with smokers. CONCLUSIONS: This research extends phantom smoking literature on college students to provide a broader picture of phantom smoking among young adults in high-risk contexts and of varying levels of educational attainment. Phantom smokers may be particularly sensitive to social pressures against smoking, suggesting the importance of identifying smoking as a behaviour (rather than identity) in cessation messaging to ensure that phantom smokers are reached. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
OBJECTIVE: To explore the prevalence and sociodemographic makeup of smokers who do not self-identify as smokers (ie, phantom smokers) compared with self-identifying smokers in a sample of bar-going young adults aged 18-30 years to more accurately assess young adult prevalence of smoking and inform cessation message targeting. METHODS: Cross-sectional surveys of smokers (n=3089) were conducted in randomly selected bars/nightclubs in seven US cities. Logistic regression models assessed associations between phantom smoking (past 30-day smoking and denial of being a smoker), tobacco and alcohol use behaviours (eg, social smoking, nicotine dependence, smoking while drinking, past 30-day alcohol use) and demographics. RESULTS: Compared with smokers, phantom smokers were more likely to be college graduates (OR=1.43, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.98) and to identify themselves as social smokers (OR=1.60, 95% CI 1.27 to 2.12). Phantom smokers had lower odds of smoking while drinking (OR=0.28, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.32), being nicotine dependent (OR=0.36, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.76) and having quit for at least 1 day in the last year (OR=0.46, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.69) compared with smokers. CONCLUSIONS: This research extends phantom smoking literature on college students to provide a broader picture of phantom smoking among young adults in high-risk contexts and of varying levels of educational attainment. Phantom smokers may be particularly sensitive to social pressures against smoking, suggesting the importance of identifying smoking as a behaviour (rather than identity) in cessation messaging to ensure that phantom smokers are reached. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://www.bmj.com/company/products-services/rights-and-licensing/.
Entities:
Keywords:
Denormalization; Priority/special populations; Surveillance and monitoring
Authors: Molly P Green; Kristen L McCausland; Haijun Xiao; Jennifer C Duke; Donna M Vallone; Cheryl G Healton Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2007-06-28 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Andrea C Villanti; Amanda L Johnson; Jessica M Rath; Valerie Williams; Donna M Vallone; David B Abrams; Donald Hedeker; Robin J Mermelstein Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2017-02-10 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Ana Paula Cupertino; Francisco Cartujano-Barrera; Jaime Perales; Taynara Formagini; Rosibel Rodríguez-Bolaños; Edward F Ellerbeck; Guadalupe Ponciano-Rodríguez; Luz Myriam Reynales-Shigematsu Journal: Telemed J E Health Date: 2018-07-26 Impact factor: 3.536
Authors: Ryan J Martin; Molly Robinson; Jennifer Cremeens-Matthews; Beth H Chaney; Kristyn Wynn; Joseph G L Lee Journal: J Community Health Date: 2018-12
Authors: Jamie Guillory; Kristine F Wiant; Matthew Farrelly; Leah Fiacco; Ishrat Alam; Leah Hoffman; Erik Crankshaw; Janine Delahanty; Tesfa N Alexander Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-06-18 Impact factor: 5.428