Literature DB >> 28705893

Evaluation of strategies to communicate harmful and potentially harmful constituent (HPHC) information through cigarette package inserts: a discrete choice experiment.

Ramzi G Salloum1, Jordan J Louviere2, Kayla R Getz1, Farahnaz Islam3, Dien Anshari3,4, Yoojin Cho3, Richard J O'Connor5, David Hammond6, James F Thrasher3.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has regulatory authority to use inserts to communicate with consumers about harmful and potentially harmful constituents (HPHCs) in tobacco products; however, little is known about the most effective manner for presenting HPHC information.
METHODS: In a discrete choice experiment, participants evaluated eight choice sets, each of which showed two cigarette packages from four different brands and tar levels (high vs low), accompanied by an insert that included between-subject manipulations (ie, listing of HPHCs vs grouping by disease outcome and numeric values ascribed to HPHCs vs no numbers) and within-subject manipulations (ie, 1 of 4 warning topics; statement linking an HPHC with disease vs statement with no HPHC link). For each choice set, participants were asked: (1) which package is more harmful and (2) which motivates them to not smoke; each with a 'no difference' option. Alternative-specific logit models regressed choice on attribute levels.
RESULTS: 1212 participants were recruited from an online consumer panel (725 18-29-year-old smokers and susceptible non-smokers and 487 30-64-year-old smokers). Participants were more likely to endorse high-tar products as more harmful than low-tar products, with a greater effect when numeric HPHC information was present. Compared with a simple warning statement, the statement linking HPHCs with disease encouraged quit motivation.
CONCLUSIONS: Numeric HPHC information on inserts appears to produce misunderstandings that some cigarettes are less harmful than others. Furthermore, brief narratives that link HPHCs to smoking-related disease may promote cessation versus communications that do not explicitly link HPHCs to disease. © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted.

Entities:  

Keywords:  carcinogens; packaging and labelling; public policy

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28705893      PMCID: PMC6156997          DOI: 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2016-053579

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tob Control        ISSN: 0964-4563            Impact factor:   6.953


  26 in total

1.  The low tar lie.

Authors:  N R Leavell
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 7.552

2.  Smokers' beliefs about "Light" and "Ultra Light" cigarettes.

Authors:  S Shiffman; J L Pillitteri; S L Burton; J M Rohay; J G Gitchell
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 7.552

3.  Consumer perception of cigarette yields: is the message relevant?

Authors:  G B Gori
Journal:  Regul Toxicol Pharmacol       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 3.271

4.  Effect of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and voluntary industry health warning labels on passage of mandated cigarette warning labels from 1965 to 2012: transition probability and event history analyses.

Authors:  Ashley N Sanders-Jackson; Anna V Song; Heikki Hiilamo; Stanton A Glantz
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2013-09-12       Impact factor: 9.308

5.  Relationship between constituent labelling and reporting of tar yields among smokers in four countries.

Authors:  R J O'Connor; L T Kozlowski; R Borland; D Hammond; A McNeill
Journal:  J Public Health (Oxf)       Date:  2006-09-14       Impact factor: 2.341

6.  Cigarette packaging: Youth perceptions of "natural" cigarettes, filter references, and contraband tobacco.

Authors:  Christine D Czoli; David Hammond
Journal:  J Adolesc Health       Date:  2013-09-04       Impact factor: 5.012

7.  Validation of susceptibility as a predictor of which adolescents take up smoking in the United States.

Authors:  J P Pierce; W S Choi; E A Gilpin; A J Farkas; R K Merritt
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 4.267

8.  Improper disclosure: tobacco packaging and emission labelling regulations.

Authors:  D Hammond; C M White
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  2012-05-19       Impact factor: 2.427

9.  Conducting discrete choice experiments to inform healthcare decision making: a user's guide.

Authors:  Emily Lancsar; Jordan Louviere
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 4.981

10.  The Use of Cigarette Package Inserts to Supplement Pictorial Health Warnings: An Evaluation of the Canadian Policy.

Authors:  James F Thrasher; Amira Osman; Erika N Abad-Vivero; David Hammond; Maansi Bansal-Travers; K Michael Cummings; James W Hardin; Crawford Moodie
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2014-12-05       Impact factor: 4.244

View more
  11 in total

1.  Does Adding Information on Toxic Constituents to Cigarette Pack Warnings Increase Smokers' Perceptions About the Health Risks of Smoking? A Longitudinal Study in Australia, Canada, Mexico, and the United States.

Authors:  Yoo Jin Cho; James F Thrasher; Kamala Swayampakala; Isaac Lipkus; David Hammond; Kenneth Michael Cummings; Ron Borland; Hua-Hie Yong; James W Hardin
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  2017-07-17

2.  Communicating about chemicals in cigarette smoke: impact on knowledge and misunderstanding.

Authors:  Allison J Lazard; M Justin Byron; Ellen Peters; Noel T Brewer
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2019-08-28       Impact factor: 7.552

3.  Testing a Brief Web-based Intervention to Increase Recognition of Tobacco Constituents.

Authors:  Elizabeth G Klein; Amanda J Quisenberry; Abigail B Shoben; Tiffany Thomson; SuSandi Htut; Randi E Foraker; Albert M Lai; Michael D Slater
Journal:  Tob Regul Sci       Date:  2018-11

4.  Assessing cigarette packaging and labelling policy effects on early adolescents: results from a discrete choice experiment.

Authors:  Inti Barrientos-Gutierrez; Farahnaz Islam; Yoo Jin Cho; Ramzi George Salloum; Jordan Louviere; Edna Arillo-Santillán; Luz Myriam Reynales-Shigematsu; Joaquin Barnoya; Belen Saenz de Miera Juarez; James Hardin; James F Thrasher
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2020-07-14       Impact factor: 7.552

5.  Assessing Smoking Cessation Messages with a Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  James F Thrasher; Dien Anshari; Victoria Lambert-Jessup; Farahnaz Islam; Erin Mead; Lucy Popova; Ramzi Salloum; Crawford Moodie; Jordan Louviere; Eric N Lindblom
Journal:  Tob Regul Sci       Date:  2018-03

6.  Framing pregnancy-related smoking cessation messages for women of reproductive age.

Authors:  Elizabeth G Klein; Joseph Macisco; Allison Lazard; Audrey Busho; Austin Oslock; Brett Worly
Journal:  Addict Behav Rep       Date:  2020-06-12

7.  Cigarette pack messages about toxic chemicals: a randomised clinical trial.

Authors:  Noel T Brewer; Michelle Jeong; Jennifer R Mendel; Marissa G Hall; Dongyu Zhang; Humberto Parada; Marcella H Boynton; Seth M Noar; Sabeeh A Baig; Jennifer C Morgan; Kurt M Ribisl
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2018-04-13       Impact factor: 7.552

8.  Using signalling theory to assess the Government of Ghana's risk communication during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Martin Owusu Ansah; Lucy Afeafa Ry-Kottoh; Enya B Ameza-Xemalordzo; Godfred Aawaar
Journal:  Health SA       Date:  2022-07-27

9.  Machine-assessed tar yield marketing on cigarette packages from two cities in South Korea.

Authors:  Michael Iacobelli; Juhee Cho; Kevin Welding; Kate Smith; Joanna E Cohen
Journal:  Tob Induc Dis       Date:  2021-06-25       Impact factor: 2.600

10.  Testing Cessation Messages for Cigarette Package Inserts: Findings from a Best/Worst Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  James F Thrasher; Farahnaz Islam; Rachel E Davis; Lucy Popova; Victoria Lambert; Yoo Jin Cho; Ramzi G Salloum; Jordan Louviere; David Hammond
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2018-02-06       Impact factor: 3.390

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.