Search

Introduction: Little systematic evidence exists about the effectiveness of cigar warnings. This study examined the perceived message effectiveness (PME) of warning statements about different health consequences caused by cigars. PME is a validated self-report scale of how effectively a health message discourages smoking.Aims and Methods: We conducted an online study from April to May 2020 with adults in the United States who used cigars in the past 30 days (n = 777). Participants were randomly assigned to view and rate PME (three items, range 1-5) for seven out of 37 text warning statements about different health consequences from cigar use. Linear mixed effects models evaluated the most effective warning characteristics (eg, type of health consequence), controlling for repeated measures and participant demographics.Results: Analyses showed that health consequences about the cardiovascular system (B = 0.38), mouth (B = 0.40), other digestive (B = 0.45), respiratory system (B = 0.36), and early death (B = 0.36) were associated with higher PME scores than reproductive health consequences (all p values <.001). Similar results were found for these health consequences compared with addiction (all p values p < .001). We also observed that awareness of the health consequence was associated with higher PME scores (B = 0.19, p < .001) and length of the warning message (number of characters) was associated with lower PME scores (B = -0.007, p = .03). No differences were observed between cancer and noncancer health consequences (p = .27) or health consequences that used plain language versus medical jargon (p = .94).Conclusions: Our study provides new evidence about the perceived effectiveness of different cigar health warning statements and identifies features that may strengthen statements.Implications: Our study with cigar smokers from across the United States provides much-needed evidence concerning the perceived effectiveness of different cigar health warning statements and features that may strengthen such statements. Mandated cigar warnings in the United States could be strengthened by including health consequences that were perceived as more effective in our study (eg, early death), using health consequences that participants were aware of, and using short warning statements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Since the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) was granted regulatory authority over tobacco products in 2009, few studies have examined perceived credibility of the FDA in this role. The current study assessed knowledge and credibility of the FDA as a regulator of tobacco products.Methods: In a nationally representative survey of U.S. adults (N = 4758), we assessed knowledge that the FDA regulates the manufacture, distribution, and marketing of cigarettes, and credibility of the FDA as a tobacco regulator. We examined demographic differences in knowledge and credibility, and associations of knowledge and trust in government with credibility perceptions.Results: Less than half of respondents reported knowing the FDA regulates how cigarettes are sold (46.8%) and advertised (49.7%), and only 36.0% knew the FDA regulates how cigarettes are made, with few demographic differences. Respondents reported that the FDA was moderately credible in regulating tobacco. Knowledge of the FDA as a tobacco regulator and trust in government were the strongest predictors of credibility. Being of younger age, being White (compared to African American), and being male were associated with higher credibility ratings of the FDA.Conclusions: Much of the public still does not know that the FDA regulates tobacco products, and credibility perceptions are moderate. Greater knowledge of the FDA's regulatory role was associated with higher credibility; efforts that increase the public's understanding of the FDA's role as a tobacco regulator may positively impact views of the agency's credibility. This may in turn improve public reception to the FDA's messages and regulations.Implications: This study is the first to show nationally representative estimates of both knowledge and credibility of the FDA as a tobacco regulator. Our research shows further that knowledge of the FDA's tobacco regulatory roles is likely to be an important factor related to perceived credibility of the FDA. Increasing the public's knowledge of the FDA's roles may enhance the agency's credibility, which can improve public reception to messages and regulations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While tobacco and alcohol co-use is highly prevalent across the United States, little experimental research has examined ways to counter such dual use. We developed and tested messages about the risks of co-using tobacco and alcohol among adults who used a combustible tobacco product and drank alcohol within the 30 days.Methods: In an online experiment, 1,300 participants were randomly assigned to read different messages about tobacco and alcohol co-use (e.g., Alcohol and tobacco cause throat cancer). Three between-subjects experiments manipulated the presence of: 1) a marker word (e.g., Warning), 2) text describing the symptoms of health effects and a quitting self-efficacy cue, and 3) an image depicting the health effect. Participants rated each message using a validated Perceived Message Effectiveness (PME) scale. We used independent samples t-tests to examine differences between experimental conditions. Results include effect sizes (Cohen's d) to compare standardized mean differences.Results: Our sample was 64% male, 70% white, 23% Black, and 17% Hispanic/Latino with a mean age of 42.4 (SD = 16.4) years. Messages that described the symptoms of the health effect (d = 0.17, p = 0.002) and included an image (d = 0.11, p = 0.04) were rated significantly higher in PME compared with messages that did not describe symptoms and were text-only. We found no significant effects of a marker word or self-efficacy cue on PME.Conclusions: Messages that describe the symptoms of health effects and include text and images may be particularly effective for communicating the risks of tobacco and alcohol co-use and decreasing adverse health effects from co-use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable disease and death globally. The 2014 Surgeon General's Report included new diseases linked to smoking, including liver and colon cancer, diabetes and tuberculosis. As more diseases are linked to smoking, which diseases should we communicate to the public and what message source has the most impact?Methods: Data were collected through a nationally representative phone survey of US adults (N=5014), conducted from September 2014 through May 2015. We experimentally randomized participants to a 2 (new smoking disease messages - liver and colon cancers compared to diabetes and tuberculosis) by 4 (message sources - CDC, FDA, Surgeon General, and none) experiment. The outcome was message believability.Results: About half the sample was female (51.5%) and 17.8% were a current smoker. Overall, 56% of participants said the messages were very believable. Cancer messages (liver and colon cancer) were significantly more believable than messages about chronic disease (tuberculosis and diabetes), 61% vs. 52%. Smokers were less likely to report both sets of new disease messages as very believable compared to non-smokers. Significantly more smokers intending to quit (44.5%) found the messages to be very believable compared to smokers not intending to quit (22.6%). Believability did not differ by message source.Conclusion: Important differences exist in believability of disease messages about new tobacco-related information. Messages emphasizing the causal link between smoking and new diseases should be considered for use in mass media campaigns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is required to communicate the risks of tobacco constituents to the public. Few studies have addressed how FDA media campaigns can effectively communicate about cigarette smoke constituents., Objective: To examine whether messages about cigarette smoke constituents are effective in reducing smoking intentions and behaviors among adults who smoke., Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial enrolled participants who were aged between 18 and 65 years, were English speakers, were living in the United States, and who smoked at least 100 cigarettes during their lifetime and now smoked every day or some days. Participants received daily messages via email for 15 days. Participants were randomized to 1 of 2 message conditions or a control group and reported their previous-day smoking behaviors daily. Follow-up surveys were conducted on days 16 and 32. Data were collected from June 2017 to April 2018 and analyzed from April to September 2018., Interventions: The 3 groups were (1) constituent plus engagement messages (eg, "Cigarette smoke contains arsenic. This causes heart damage.") that included the FDA as the source and engagement text (eg, "Within 3 months of quitting, your heart and lungs work better. Ready to be tobacco free? You can quit. For free nicotine replacement, call 1-800-QUIT-NOW"); (2) constituent-only messages that did not list the FDA as the source or include engagement text; and (3) a control condition with messages about littering cigarette butts., Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the change in quit intentions (range, 1-4, with higher scores indicating stronger intentions) from pretest to day 16. Secondary outcome measures included daily smoking behaviors and quit attempts., Results: A total of 789 participants (mean [SD] age, 43.4 [12.9] years; 483 [61.2%] women; 578 [73.3%] White; 717 [90.9%] non-Hispanic) were included in the study. The mean (SD) quit intention score was 2.5 (0.9) at pretest. Mean (SE) change in quit intention score from pretest to day 16 was 0.19 (0.07) points higher in the constituent plus engagement condition than in the control condition (P = .005) and 0.23 (0.07) points higher in the constituent-only condition compared with the control condition (P = .001). Participant reports of cigarettes smoked, forgone, and butted out were similar across study conditions at baseline and did not differ significantly at days 16 and 32 across study conditions. Viewing more messages was associated with an estimated decrease of 0.15 (SE, 0.01) cigarettes smoked per day per message viewed overall across conditions., Conclusions and Relevance: To our knowledge, this is the first longitudinal test of cigarette constituent campaign messages in a national sample of adults who currently smoke. Messages about cigarette smoke constituents, with or without engagement text and source information, increased participants' intentions to quit, lending support to FDA efforts to educate consumers about such constituents., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03339206.

Importance: Skin cancer is the most common cancer in the United States, and men experience higher rates of skin cancer than women. Despite publicized preventative measures, men are less likely than women to use sunscreen., Objective: To assess men's motivations, behaviors, and preferred product characteristics towards daily sunscreen use., Design and Setting: Cross-sectional online survey of 705 men, administered July&ndash; August 2019, using Survey Monkey and distributed through Amazon Mechanical Turk., Participants: Men ages 20&ndash;70, having completed at least High School/GED, and living in the United States were eligible. Sampling strategy ensured diversity in terms of race, ethnicity, and sexual orientation. Main Outcome(s) and Measures: Men&rsquo;s sunscreen use, behaviors, and preferred skincare product characteristics., Results: Final participants included 705 men. The most frequent skincare products used regularly were liquid soap/body wash (65%), bar soap (47%), and moisturizers (32%). Most men (n=612; 83%) reported not using sunscreen daily, and 38% reported using sunscreen weekly. Income was related to daily and weekly sunscreen use, as males who earned between $40-$50,000 annually used sunscreen less often compared to people who earned $100,000 annually (OR 0.54%, 95% CI &minus;0.34% to .88%; P = .01). Age, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, and region were not related to daily or weekly sunscreen use. Main motivators for daily sunscreen use included reducing skin cancer risk (n=575; 82%) and looking younger (n=299; 42%)., Conclusions and Relevance: This survey shows lapses in evidenced-based sunscreen behaviors to reduce skin cancer among men. Campaigns to reduce skin cancer should focus on increasing men's interest in daily sunscreen use and adherence to wearing sun-protective products. J Drugs Dermatol. 2021;20(1):88-93. doi:10.36849/JDD.5470.

Combustible tobacco users appear to be at greater risk for serious complications from COVID-19. This study examined cigar smokers' perceived risk of COVID-19, quit intentions, and behaviors during the current pandemic. We conducted an online study between 23 April 2020 to 7 May 2020, as part of an ongoing study examining perceptions of different health effects of cigars. All participants used cigars in the past 30 days (n = 777). Three-quarters of the sample (76.0%) perceived they had a higher risk of complications from COVID-19 compared to non-smokers. The majority of participants (70.8%) intended to quit in the next six months due to COVID-19, and almost half of the sample (46.5%) reported making a quit attempt since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic. Far more participants reported increasing their tobacco use since COVID-19 started (40.9%) vs. decreasing their tobacco use (17.8%). Black or African American participants, participants who reported using a quitline, and participants with higher COVID-19 risk perceptions had higher intentions to quit using tobacco due to COVID-19, and higher odds of making a quit attempt since COVID-19 started. More research is needed to understand how tobacco users are perceiving COVID-19 risks and changing their tobacco use behaviors.

The US Food and Drug Administration is tasked with communicating information to the public about the harmful chemicals in cigarette smoke. Our study used eye tracking method to test the effectiveness of messages about the harmful chemicals in cigarettes smoke among adult smokers. A sample size of 211 current cigarette smokers viewed four communication messages that included: Health effects of a chemical in cigarette smoke and an image depicting the health effect. The messages focused on arsenic, formaldehyde, uranium, and general health. Eye tracking recorded the length of time participants viewed the text and the image. After each message, the participants were asked about the messages' effectiveness in changing attitudes towards smoking. We analyzed the data using multilevel modeling, and of the 211 smokers, 59.7% were female, 36.5% were Black, and 21.3% had a high school degree or less. Compared to the general message, the messages about formaldehyde and uranium were more discouraging to smoking ( p < 0.05). Messages about formaldehyde were more believable and made participants want to quit more than the general messages. Increasing message dose was significantly associated with discouraging participants from smoking and made participants want to quit ( p < 0.05). Our findings suggest that anti-smoking messages, containing chemical information, can successfully increase negative attitudes toward smoking cigarettes and potentially encourage quitting.

Introduction: We conducted two experiments to examine the believability of three addiction-focused cigarette warnings and the influence of message source on believability among adolescents and adults in the United States., Methods: Experimental data were collected using national phone surveys of adolescents (age 13-17; n = 1125; response rate, 66%) and adults (age 18+; n = 5014; response rate, 42%). We assessed the believability of three cigarette warnings about addiction attributed to four message sources (Food and Drug Administration [FDA], Surgeon General, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], no source)., Results: The majority of adolescents and adults reported the three cigarette warnings were very believable (49%-81% for adolescents; 47%-76% for adults). We found four to five times higher odds of adolescents believing a warning that cigarettes are addictive (warning 1) or that nicotine was an addictive chemical (warning 2) compared to a warning that differentiated the addictive risks of menthol versus traditional cigarettes (warning 3), warning 1 adjusted odds ratio (aOR): 4.53, 95% confidence interval (CI): 3.10, 6.63; warning 2 aOR: 3.87, 95% CI: 2.70, 5.50. Similarly, we found three to five times higher odds of adults (including current smokers) believing the same warnings, warning 1 aOR: 3.74, 95% CI: 2.82, 4.95; warning 2 aOR: 3.24, 95% CI: 2.45, 4.28. Message source had no overall impact on the believability of warnings for either population., Conclusions: Our findings support the implementation of FDA's required warnings that cigarettes are addictive and that nicotine is an addictive chemical. These believable warnings may deter adolescents from initiating smoking and encourage adults to quit smoking., Implications: This article describes, for the first time, the believability of different cigarette warnings about addiction. We now know that the majority of adolescents and adults believe cigarette warnings that highlight cigarettes as addictive and that nicotine is an addictive chemical in tobacco. However, a warning that highlighted the relative risk of addiction for menthol cigarettes compared to traditional cigarettes was not as believable among either population. Our findings support the implementation of FDA's required warnings that cigarettes are addictive and that nicotine is an addictive chemical that may deter adolescents from initiating smoking and encourage adults to quit smoking.

While the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has had regulatory authority over tobacco products since 2009, public awareness of this authority remains limited. This research examines several broad types of information about FDA tobacco regulatory mission that may improve the perceptions of FDA as a tobacco regulator. Using Amazon Mechanical Turk, 1766 adults, smokers and non-smokers, were randomly assigned to view a statement about FDA regulatory authority that varied three information types in a 2 × 2 × 2 between subjects experimental design: (1) FDA's roles in regulating tobacco (yes/no); (2) The scientific basis of regulations (yes/no); and (3) A potential protective function of regulations (yes/no). Using factorial ANOVA, we estimated the main and interactive effects of all three types of information and of smoking status on the perceptions of FDA. Participants that were exposed to information on FDA roles reported higher FDA credibility and a greater perceived knowledge of FDA than those who did not. Exposure to information about the scientific basis of regulations led to more negative views of the tobacco industry. Participants who learned of the FDA's commitment to protecting the public reported higher FDA credibility and more positive attitudes toward regulations than those who did not learn of this commitment. We observed no significant interaction effects. The findings suggest that providing information about the regulatory roles and protective characterization of the FDA's tobacco regulatory mission positively influence public perceptions of FDA and tobacco regulations., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Several health-related agencies administer national and targeted public education campaigns to provide health information and change health-related behaviors. The trust the public has in these agencies as the source of the message impacts the effectiveness of their communication campaigns. In this study, we explore the perceived trust of agencies that communicate health messages in the tobacco control field. As part of a larger tobacco regulatory science study, we conducted six 90-min focus groups comprising 41 participants. Five main themes emerged pertinent to the agency: (1) its integrity, (2) its competence, (3) its motives, (4) how it is portrayed in the media, and (5) skepticism and mistrust about it. Given the significant resources spent on health messaging to the public and potential benefits offered by this communication, an understanding of public trust in the agencies as the source of health messages is important. Findings suggest health information may be ignored or discounted when there is mistrust in the agency sending those messages.

Background : Text warnings are mandated on cigars sold in the United States (U.S.), however little published research has examined effectiveness of cigar warnings. This is the first study examining the believability of cigar warnings among adults in the U.S. Methods : Adults in the U.S. ( n = 5014) were randomized in a phone survey to receive one of three cigar-specific mandated warning messages ("Cigar smoking can cause cancers of the mouth and throat, even if you do not inhale", "Cigar smoking can cause lung cancer and heart disease", and "Cigars are not a safe alternative to cigarettes") with one of four warning sources (no source, Surgeon General, CDC (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), FDA (Food and Drug Administration)). Results : Most adults found the cigar warnings very believable (66.9%). Weighted logistic regression results indicate that the message "Cigar smoking can cause lung cancer and heart disease" was associated with higher odds of being very believable (AOR: 2.05, 95% CI: 1.55, 2.70) and the message "Cigars are not a safe alternative to cigarettes" was associated with lower odds of being very believable (AOR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.55, 0.92) compared to the message "Cigar smoking can cause cancers of the mouth and throat, even if you do not inhale". Warning source had no impact on believability. Conclusions : We tested three of the currently mandated cigar warnings in the U.S. and found significant differences in believability between them. Further research on cigar warnings may improve communication to the public on cigar health risks, ultimately preventing uptake of cigars and promoting cessation among cigar users., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.