Impact of Tobacco-Pack Pictorial Warnings on Youth and Young adults: A Systematic Review of Experimental Studies

Introduction:We conducted a systematic review of the experimental literature on the impact of tobacco-pack pictorial warning labels (PWLs) on youth and young adults. Methods:We systematically searched computerized databases and the reference list of relevant articles. We included studies that used an experimental protocol to assess PWLs. Studies had to report findings for youth or young adult samples (aged \u3c 30 years). Thirty-one studies met the inclusion criteria, with a total sample size of 27506. Two coders independently coded all study characteristics and outcomes. Results:Twenty-eight studies experimentally evaluated PWLs for cigarette packs while three studies evaluated PWLs for smokeless tobacco packs. Generally, PWLs led to higher attention, stronger cognitive and affective reactions, more negative pack attitudes and smoking attitudes, and increased intentions not to use tobacco products compared to text warnings. PWLs were perceived to be more effective than text warnings for both cigarette packs and smokeless tobacco packs. Conclusions:The systematic review showed that PWLs on tobacco products are effective across a wide range of tobacco-related outcomes among young people. Gaps in the literature include a lack of research on tobacco initiation and cessation and a dearth of literature on non-cigarette tobacco products

E-cigarettes, Hookah Pens and Vapes: Adolescent and Young Adult Perceptions of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: Table 1.

Most studies have assessed use of “e-cigarettes” or “electronic cigarettes,” potentially excluding new electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), such as e-hookahs and vape pens. Little is known about how adolescents and young adults perceive ENDS and if their perceptions vary by sub-type. We explored ENDS perceptions among these populations

Adolescent and Young Adult Perceptions of Hookah and Little Cigars/Cigarillos: Implications for Risk Messages

Use of hookah and little cigars/cigarillos (LCCs) is high among adolescents and young adults. Although these products have health effects similar to cigarettes, adolescents and young adults believe them to be safer. This study examined adolescent and young adult perceptions of hookah and LCCs to develop risk messages aimed at discouraging use among users and at-risk nonusers. Ten focus groups with 77 adolescents and young adults were conducted to explore their perceptions about the perceived risks and benefits of hookah and LCC use. Participants were users of other (non-cigarette) tobacco products (n=47) and susceptible nonusers (n=30). Transcripts were coded for emergent themes on participants’ perceptions of hookah and LCCs. Participants did not perceive health effects associated with hookah and LCC use to be serious or likely to happen given their infrequency of use and perceptions that they are less harmful than cigarettes. Participants generally had positive associations with smoking hookah and LCCs for several reasons, including that they are used in social gatherings, come in various flavors, and can be used to perform smoke tricks. Because adolescents and young adults underestimate and discount the long-term risks associated with hookah and LCC use, effective messages may be those that focus on the acute/immediate health and cosmetic effects

Adolescents’ and Young Adults’ Knowledge and Beliefs About Constituents in Novel Tobacco Products

Novel tobacco products, such as little cigars, cigarillos, hookah, and e-cigarettes, and their smoke or aerosol contain chemicals which the FDA has determined to be Harmful or Potentially Harmful Constituents. We explored adolescents’ and young adults’ knowledge and beliefs about constituents in novel tobacco products and their smoke or aerosol, in order to inform risk communication messages

Health Claims, Marketing Appeals, and Warnings on Popular Brands of Waterpipe Tobacco Packaging Sold in the United States

INTRODUCTION: Waterpipe tobacco (WT) smoking is associated with misperceptions of harm, especially among users. WT packaging contains imagery, flavor descriptors, and text claims that may contribute to misperceptions. The study goal was to characterize visual and text elements of WT packaging. AIMS AND METHODS: Using data from the U.S. Population Assessment on Tobacco and Health Study Wave 2 (October 2014–October 2015), we identified the 10 most popular WT brands. For each brand, we identified available flavors, including flavor collections with unique packaging elements. We randomly selected 10 flavors per brand for purchase (March–April 2018). We conducted descriptive content analysis to code all textual and visual design elements of each package. RESULTS: Over half (54%) of WT packages had modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims prohibited by federal law, including substance-free MRTP claims (43%) and the descriptor “natural” (11%). No MRTP reduced exposure or reduced risk claims were found. Over a quarter (26%) of packaging including one or more of terms that may imply reduced harm including “fresh,” “premium,” “quality,” and “pure.” All packages included a text-only warning, yet none appeared on the primary display panel. Almost all packaging (99%) included imagery, with 72% including flavor imagery. The majority of packages (72%) included a smoking cue. The most popular marketing appeals were “well-made” (57%), “enjoyable” (55%), and “patriotic” (47%). CONCLUSIONS: Prohibited MRTP claims, other descriptors, and flavor imagery are common on WT packaging, despite federal law. Future research is needed to evaluate if this marketing contributes to misperceptions of reduced harm. IMPLICATIONS: Tobacco packaging is used to convey health-related messages, both explicitly and implicitly; however, information about WT packaging is virtually nonexistent. We conducted a content analysis of WT packaging from the 10 most popular US brands. Over half (54%) of packages had prohibited MRTP claims and over a quarter (26%) included one or more descriptors that may be perceived as implying reduced harm. Use of imagery, including smoking cues, was common. The widespread use of prohibited MRTP claims, other descriptors, and imagery on WT packaging may contribute to misperceptions of reduced harm

Are Some of the Cigar Warnings Mandated in the U.S. More Believable Than Others?

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

Longitudinal associations between marijuana and cigar use in young adults.

BACKGROUND: We assess the longitudinal associations between marijuana and cigar (little cigars and cigarillos [LCCs] and large cigars) use on subsequent initiation of marijuana and cigar use. METHODS: Data are from a cohort study of 2189 young adults recruited in fall 2010 from 11 colleges in the Southeast. We used discrete-time survival analysis to examine whether ever use of marijuana at baseline (spring 2011, freshman year) predicted initiation of LCCs and large cigars and whether ever use of these cigar products predicted initiation of marijuana use across 10 waves of data collection (2011-2018). RESULTS: The sample was 65.3 % female, 83.6 % White, 5.9 % Hispanic, and 61.8 % had college-educated mothers. At baseline, 70 % reported never using LCCs, 71 % reported never using large cigars, and 74 % reported never using marijuana. Ever use of marijuana at baseline was associated with an increased risk of LCC initiation (Incident rate ratio [IRR] = 1.6, 95 %CI = 1.0, 2.5) but not large cigar initiation. Ever use of LCCs (IRR = 1.4, 95 %CI = 1.1, 1.8) and ever use of large cigars (IRR = 1.3, 95 %CI = 1.1, 1.8) at baseline both predicted initiation of marijuana use. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support growing evidence that marijuana and LCCs are strongly associated and use of one substance predicts use of the other. In contrast to studies of adults, we also found that young adults who have tried large cigars may be at increased risk for subsequent marijuana use. These findings highlight the need to consider each product as a potential gateway of the other when developing interventions for young adults

What Do Adolescents and Young Adults Think a Cigarillo Is? Implications for Health Communication

Cigarillo use has increased among adolescents and young adults and has remained high. Public education efforts are needed to communicate with these populations about cigarillo use risks, but little is known about the implications of using the term “cigarillo” in such efforts. The study goal was to assess adolescent and young adult perceptions of the term “cigarillo”. We conducted a nationally representative online survey of 3517 adolescents and young adults (ages 13–25). We asked participants “what is a cigarillo?” with several response options. Participants were 49.6% female, 69.8% white, 5.2% reported past 30-day cigarillo use, and 11.6% reported lifetime cigarillo use. The most common response to the question “what is a cigarillo” was “I don’t know” (51% of participants), followed by “a thinner and smaller version of a traditional cigar” (30.1% of participants), which was chosen by 19.4% of adolescents and 36.8% of young adults. Among past 30-day cigarillo users, the most common response was “I don’t know” (54.9%) followed by “a thinner and smaller version of a traditional cigar” (45.1%). Cigarillo users were more likely to select the “a thinner and smaller version of a traditional cigar” response than nonusers. Findings suggest that many adolescents and young adults have varied understandings of the term “cigarillo”. Researchers and practitioners need to ensure that terminology used in health communication campaigns is clearly understood by the target audience to maximize effectiveness

Are Some of the Cigar Warnings Mandated in the U.S. More Believable Than Others?

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

Who Is Exposed to E-Cigarette Advertising and Where? Differences between Adolescents, Young Adults and Older Adults

Little is known about differences between adolescents’ and adults’ exposure to e-cigarette advertising in various media channels, such as retail establishments, print, television, radio, and digital marketing. We examined the exposure to e-cigarette advertising in these channels amongst adolescents (13–17), young adults (18–25), and older adults (26+). Adolescents (N = 1124), young adults (N = 809), and adults (N = 4186) were recruited through two nationally representative phone surveys from 2014–2015. Lifetime e-cigarette advertising exposure was prevalent (84.5%). Overall, older adult males and older adult cigarette smokers reported the highest exposure to e-cigarette advertising (p < 0.001). Television was the largest source of exposure for all age groups. Adolescents and young adults had higher odds than older adults of exposure through television and digital marketing. However, adolescents had lower odds than young adults and older adults of exposure through retailers and print media. Although e-cigarette advertising appears to be reaching the intended audience of adult smokers, vulnerable populations are being exposed at high rates via television and digital marketing. Regulations aimed at curbing exposure through these media channels are needed, as are counter advertising and prevention campaigns