Dirk-Jan A van Mourik1, Gera E Nagelhout2, Hein de Vries3, Bas van den Putte4, K Michael Cummings5, Ron Borland6, Geoffrey T Fong7, Marc C Willemsen8. 1. Department of Health Promotion, Maastricht University (CAPHRI), Maastricht, the Netherlands. Electronic address: d.vanmourik@maastrichtuniversity.nl. 2. Department of Health Promotion, Maastricht University (CAPHRI), Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Family Medicine, Maastricht University (CAPHRI), Maastricht, the Netherlands; IVO Research Institute, The Hague, the Netherlands. 3. Department of Health Promotion, Maastricht University (CAPHRI), Maastricht, the Netherlands. 4. Department of Communication, University of Amsterdam (ASCoR), Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 5. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, United States. 6. Cancer Council Victoria, Melbourne, Australia. 7. Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada; School of Public Health and Health Systems, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada; Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, Canada. 8. Department of Health Promotion, Maastricht University (CAPHRI), Maastricht, the Netherlands; Trimbos Institute, Netherlands Expertise Center for Tobacco Control (NET), Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our study evaluated the short-term impact of introducing European Union's tobacco pictorial health warnings (PHWs). METHODS: Longitudinal data were collected at two time-points from adult smokers, participating in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) surveys, conducted in the Netherlands, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. In the Netherlands, textual health warnings (THWs) were replaced by PHWs between both time-points. Health warning policies did not change in the other countries. Data from continuing smokers were used (N = 3,487) and analyzed using Generalized Estimating Equations. RESULTS: Between both time-points, only Dutch smokers showed increases in noticing health warnings (β = 0.712, p < 0.001), self-reports of health warnings leading to a cognitive response such as thinking about smoking health-risks (SHRs) (OR = 1.834, p < 0.001), knowledge about SHRs (β = 0.369, p < 0.001), and avoiding health warnings (OR = 9.869, p < 0.001). However, Dutch smokers showed no changes in attitude towards smoking (β = 0.035, p = 0.518), intention to quit smoking (OR = 0.791, p = 0.157), self-efficacy to quit smoking (β=-0.072, p = 0.286), or reporting that health warnings helped them to resist having a cigarette (OR = 1.091, p = 0.714). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that introducing the European PHWs was effective in provoking changes closely related to health warnings, but there was no direct impact on variables more closely related to smoking cessation.
BACKGROUND: Our study evaluated the short-term impact of introducing European Union's tobacco pictorial health warnings (PHWs). METHODS: Longitudinal data were collected at two time-points from adult smokers, participating in the International Tobacco Control (ITC) surveys, conducted in the Netherlands, Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom and the United States. In the Netherlands, textual health warnings (THWs) were replaced by PHWs between both time-points. Health warning policies did not change in the other countries. Data from continuing smokers were used (N = 3,487) and analyzed using Generalized Estimating Equations. RESULTS: Between both time-points, only Dutch smokers showed increases in noticing health warnings (β = 0.712, p < 0.001), self-reports of health warnings leading to a cognitive response such as thinking about smoking health-risks (SHRs) (OR = 1.834, p < 0.001), knowledge about SHRs (β = 0.369, p < 0.001), and avoiding health warnings (OR = 9.869, p < 0.001). However, Dutch smokers showed no changes in attitude towards smoking (β = 0.035, p = 0.518), intention to quit smoking (OR = 0.791, p = 0.157), self-efficacy to quit smoking (β=-0.072, p = 0.286), or reporting that health warnings helped them to resist having a cigarette (OR = 1.091, p = 0.714). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that introducing the European PHWs was effective in provoking changes closely related to health warnings, but there was no direct impact on variables more closely related to smoking cessation.
Authors: R C Brownson; J Jackson-Thompson; J C Wilkerson; J R Davis; N W Owens; E B Fisher Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 1992-01 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: R Borland; N Wilson; G T Fong; D Hammond; K M Cummings; H-H Yong; W Hosking; G Hastings; J Thrasher; A McNeill Journal: Tob Control Date: 2009-06-28 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Annika C Green; Susan C Kaai; Geoffrey T Fong; Pete Driezen; Anne C K Quah; Premduth Burhoo Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2014-04-18 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Seth M Noar; Diane B Francis; Christy Bridges; Jennah M Sontag; Kurt M Ribisl; Noel T Brewer Journal: Soc Sci Med Date: 2016-07-13 Impact factor: 4.634
Authors: Hua-Hie Yong; Geoffrey T Fong; Pete Driezen; Ron Borland; Anne C K Quah; Buppha Sirirassamee; Stephen Hamann; Maizurah Omar Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2013-01-04 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Seth M Noar; Marissa G Hall; Diane B Francis; Kurt M Ribisl; Jessica K Pepper; Noel T Brewer Journal: Tob Control Date: 2015-05-06 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Iris van der Heide; Jany Rademakers; Maarten Schipper; Mariël Droomers; Kristine Sørensen; Ellen Uiters Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-02-27 Impact factor: 3.295