Maria Roditis1, Kevin Delucchi2, David Cash1, Bonnie Halpern-Felsher3. 1. Division of Adolescent Medicine, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. 2. Department of Psychiatry, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California. 3. Division of Adolescent Medicine, School of Medicine, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. Electronic address: bonnie.halpernfelsher@stanford.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study assesses perceptions of overall harm, short-term health and social risks, long-term health risks, and benefits associated with various tobacco products including conventional cigarettes, e-cigarettes, cigars, chew, and hookah. This study also assesses whether and how perceptions differ by age, gender, race/ethnicity, and previous experience with tobacco. METHODS: A total of 722 high school students completed an online survey, answering questions about their use and perceptions of a variety of tobacco products. Differences in perceptions across products were assessed using a generalized estimation equation with an exchangeable correlation structure. RESULTS: Adolescents rated the various tobacco products as conferring significantly different levels of risks and benefits. Generally, adolescents rated cigarettes as most risky, followed by cigars and chew, with hookah and e-cigarettes rated as least risky. Adolescents rated hookah followed by cigarettes and e-cigarettes as most likely to make them look cool or fit in and cigars and chew as least likely to confer these benefits. There were interaction effects by age and use, with older adolescents and those with tobacco experience holding lower perceptions of risk. There were no significant interaction effects by race/ethnicity or gender. CONCLUSION: Given the significant differences in adolescents' perceptions of risks and benefits of using different tobacco products and research showing the predictive relationship between perceptions and behavior, there is a need for comprehensive messaging that discusses risks of all tobacco products, particularly hookah and e-cigarettes. There is also a need to address perceived benefits of tobacco products, especially hookah and e-cigarettes.
OBJECTIVE: This study assesses perceptions of overall harm, short-term health and social risks, long-term health risks, and benefits associated with various tobacco products including conventional cigarettes, e-cigarettes, cigars, chew, and hookah. This study also assesses whether and how perceptions differ by age, gender, race/ethnicity, and previous experience with tobacco. METHODS: A total of 722 high school students completed an online survey, answering questions about their use and perceptions of a variety of tobacco products. Differences in perceptions across products were assessed using a generalized estimation equation with an exchangeable correlation structure. RESULTS: Adolescents rated the various tobacco products as conferring significantly different levels of risks and benefits. Generally, adolescents rated cigarettes as most risky, followed by cigars and chew, with hookah and e-cigarettes rated as least risky. Adolescents rated hookah followed by cigarettes and e-cigarettes as most likely to make them look cool or fit in and cigars and chew as least likely to confer these benefits. There were interaction effects by age and use, with older adolescents and those with tobacco experience holding lower perceptions of risk. There were no significant interaction effects by race/ethnicity or gender. CONCLUSION: Given the significant differences in adolescents' perceptions of risks and benefits of using different tobacco products and research showing the predictive relationship between perceptions and behavior, there is a need for comprehensive messaging that discusses risks of all tobacco products, particularly hookah and e-cigarettes. There is also a need to address perceived benefits of tobacco products, especially hookah and e-cigarettes.
Authors: Vivek Anand; Kaye L McGinty; Kevin O'Brien; Gregory Guenthner; Ellen Hahn; Catherine A Martin Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Bridget K Ambrose; Brian L Rostron; Sarah E Johnson; David B Portnoy; Benjamin J Apelberg; Annette R Kaufman; Conrad J Choiniere Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2014-08 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Erin L Sutfin; Thomas P McCoy; Holly E R Morrell; Bettina B Hoeppner; Mark Wolfson Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2013-06-07 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Tamika D Gilreath; Adam Leventhal; Jessica L Barrington-Trimis; Jennifer B Unger; Tess Boley Cruz; Kiros Berhane; Jimi Huh; Robert Urman; Kejia Wang; Steve Howland; Mary Ann Pentz; Chih Ping Chou; Rob McConnell Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2015-11-17 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Robyn Martin; Sahar D Safaee; Khamphithoune Somsamouth; Boualoy Mounivong; Ryan Sinclair; Shweta Bansal; Pramil N Singh Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2013-05-24 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: David R Strong; Karen Messer; Martha White; Yuyan Shi; Madison Noble; David B Portnoy; Alexander Persoskie; Annette R Kaufman; Kelvin Choi; Charles Carusi; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Andrew Hyland; John Pierce Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2019-01-03 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Maria Cooper; Alexandra Loukas; Kathleen R Case; C Nathan Marti; Cheryl L Perry Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Vivian Y Lin; Matthew D Fain; Patricia L Jackson; Taylor F Berryhill; Landon S Wilson; Marina Mazur; Stephen J Barnes; J Edwin Blalock; S Vamsee Raju; Steven M Rowe Journal: Am J Respir Cell Mol Biol Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 6.914
Authors: Jessica L King; David Reboussin; Jennifer Cornacchione Ross; Kimberly D Wiseman; Kimberly G Wagoner; Erin L Sutfin Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2018-08-13 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Paula Lozano; Edna Arillo-Santillán; Inti Barrientos-Gutíerrez; Luz Myriam Reynales Shigematsu; James F Thrasher Journal: Health Educ Behav Date: 2019-01-04