Benjamin W Chaffee1, Janelle Urata2, Elizabeth T Couch1, Stuart A Gansky3. 1. Assistant Professor, University of California San Francisco, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dental Sciences, San Francisco, CA. 2. Clinical Research Coordinator, University of California San Francisco, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dental Sciences, San Francisco, CA. 3. Professor, University of California San Francisco, Department of Preventive and Restorative Dental Sciences, San Francisco, CA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Beliefs that flavored smokeless tobacco (ST) is more pleasant, less potent, or otherwise easier to use could contribute to youth initiation. We evaluated associations between perceived ease-of-use of flavored ST (moist snuff and chewing tobacco) and ST initiation susceptibility in a representative sample of US youth. METHODS: Among 7,718 tobacco never-users in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study (age: 12-17; collected: 2013-2014), we compared 4 ST susceptibility items (curiosity, expectation, willingness to try, and a composite) according to whether participants reported flavored ST to be "easier to use" than unflavored ST. We calculated marginal prevalences of ST susceptibility and odds ratios adjusted for socio-demographic characteristics, tobacco advertisement receptivity, warning label exposure, and sensation seeking. RESULTS: ST susceptibility was greatest among tobacco never-users who perceived flavored ST as easier to use. Adjusted odds of potential ST susceptibility (≥1 item) were 1.5-fold higher (95% confidence interval: 1.2, 1.8) among adolescents who perceived flavored ST as easier to use than unflavored ST. CONCLUSIONS: ST flavors could contribute to perceptions that facilitate youth initiation. Alternatively, youth susceptible to ST use may perceive flavored varieties differently. Prospective studies are warranted to strengthen causal evidence and measure ST initiation according to perceived ease-of-use.
OBJECTIVES: Beliefs that flavored smokeless tobacco (ST) is more pleasant, less potent, or otherwise easier to use could contribute to youth initiation. We evaluated associations between perceived ease-of-use of flavored ST (moist snuff and chewing tobacco) and ST initiation susceptibility in a representative sample of US youth. METHODS: Among 7,718 tobacco never-users in the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health study (age: 12-17; collected: 2013-2014), we compared 4 ST susceptibility items (curiosity, expectation, willingness to try, and a composite) according to whether participants reported flavored ST to be "easier to use" than unflavored ST. We calculated marginal prevalences of ST susceptibility and odds ratios adjusted for socio-demographic characteristics, tobacco advertisement receptivity, warning label exposure, and sensation seeking. RESULTS: ST susceptibility was greatest among tobacco never-users who perceived flavored ST as easier to use. Adjusted odds of potential ST susceptibility (≥1 item) were 1.5-fold higher (95% confidence interval: 1.2, 1.8) among adolescents who perceived flavored ST as easier to use than unflavored ST. CONCLUSIONS: ST flavors could contribute to perceptions that facilitate youth initiation. Alternatively, youth susceptible to ST use may perceive flavored varieties differently. Prospective studies are warranted to strengthen causal evidence and measure ST initiation according to perceived ease-of-use.
Authors: Andrew J Oliver; Joni A Jensen; Rachel I Vogel; Amanda J Anderson; Dorothy K Hatsukami Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2012-04-22 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Brian V Fix; Richard J O'Connor; Lisa Vogl; Danielle Smith; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Kevin P Conway; Bridget Ambrose; Ling Yang; Andrew Hyland Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2013-12-29 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Laura Kann; Tim McManus; William A Harris; Shari L Shanklin; Katherine H Flint; Joseph Hawkins; Barbara Queen; Richard Lowry; Emily O'Malley Olsen; David Chyen; Lisa Whittle; Jemekia Thornton; Connie Lim; Yoshimi Yamakawa; Nancy Brener; Stephanie Zaza Journal: MMWR Surveill Summ Date: 2016-06-10
Authors: Bridget K Ambrose; Hannah R Day; Brian Rostron; Kevin P Conway; Nicolette Borek; Andrew Hyland; Andrea C Villanti Journal: JAMA Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Cheryl L Perry; MeLisa R Creamer; Benjamin W Chaffee; Jennifer B Unger; Erin L Sutfin; Grace Kong; Ce Shang; Stephanie L Clendennen; Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin; Mary Ann Pentz Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Georges J Nahhas; K Michael Cummings; Michael J Halenar; Eva Sharma; Anthony J Alberg; Dorothy Hatuskami; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Andrew Hyland; Diann E Gaalema; Pamela B Morris; Kara Duffy; Joanne T Chang; Guy Lagaud; Juan C Vivar; Daniela Marshall; Carlos Blanco; Kristie A Taylor Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2021-11-30
Authors: Benjamin W Chaffee; Elizabeth T Couch; Janelle Urata; David Cash; Miranda Werts; Bonnie Halpern-Felsher Journal: Tob Induc Dis Date: 2020-08-28 Impact factor: 2.600