Awareness and trust of the FDA and CDC: Results from a national sample of US adults and adolescents

Kowitt, Sarah D.; Schmidt, Allison M.; Hannan, Anika; Goldstein, Adam O.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0177546

Cited by 66 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such differences are not surprising. Previous research has demonstrated lower levels of trust among smokers in sources of health information [ 37 ] and in government agencies [ 5 ]. In addition, research on information processing shows that when a message is threatening to one’s existing attitude, those who believe that the message is relevant to them are more likely to generate critical judgments regarding the message’s content, quality, and credibility than individuals for whom the message is less relevant [ 38 , 39 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Perceptions of FDA’s credibility as a tobacco regulator (i.e., its expertise, trustworthiness, and accountability in this role) may also determine receptivity to, and persuasion by, FDA communications about the harms of tobacco products [ 4 ]. Research in the United States (US), however, shows moderate levels of trust in government agencies, including those that were tasked to implement tobacco control measures [ 5 , 6 ]. One study found that federal agencies, such as FDA, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) emerged third (42%) in ratings of trust in online health information resources after personal doctor (59%), and medical universities (48%) [ 6 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a 2015 Pew Research Center Poll, only 51% and 71% of the US population reported that they view the FDA and CDC favorably [ 7 ]. A more recent study by Kowitt et al, (2017) found that only 43% of US adults reported trust in the federal government and that trust in FDA was moderate (62%) but lower than trust in the CDC (65%) [ 5 ]. Research also shows low public awareness of FDA’s tobacco regulatory and communication roles [ 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Information to Improve Public Perceptions of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA’s) Tobacco Regulatory Role

Osman

Kowitt

Sheeran

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Information to Improve Public Perceptions of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA’s) Tobacco Regulatory Role

Osman

Kowitt

Sheeran

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…National polling data shows that despite having high levels of trust in federal health agencies overall, trust levels have recently declined, and trust in pharmaceutical companies is at an all-time low (Harris Poll, 2015; Gallup Poll, 2016). A recent study confirmed 65% of American adults trust the CDC and 63% trust the FDA (Kowitt et al, 2017). Trust in the role these institutions play in the vaccine process is less studied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 95%

Determinants of trust in the flu vaccine for African Americans and Whites

Freimuth

Jamison

et al. 2017

Social Science & Medicine

133

121

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trust is thought to be a major factor in vaccine decisions, but few studies have empirically tested the role of trust in adult immunization. Utilizing a 2015 national survey of African American and White adults (n=1,630), we explore multiple dimensions of trust related to influenza immunization, including generalized trust, trust in the flu vaccine, and trust in the vaccine production process. We find African Americans report lower trust than Whites across all trust measures. When considering demographic, racial, and ideological predictors, generalized trust shows statistically significant effects on both trust in the flu vaccine and trust in the vaccine process. When controlling for demographic, racial, and ideological variables, higher generalized trust was significantly associated with higher trust in the flu vaccine and the vaccine process. When controlling for generalized trust, in addition to the baseline covariates, psychosocial predictors (i.e. risk perception, social norms, knowledge) are significant predictors of trust in flu vaccine and trust in the vaccine process, with significant differences by race. These findings suggest that trust in vaccination is complex, and that significant differences in trust between White and African American adults may be contributing to disparities in influenza immunization.

show abstract

“…It is possible that adults perceive the source agencies in similar ways or that adults in the U.S. may assume that a tobacco warning is coming from a government health agency, even if this is not explicitly stated. Recently published data from the same dataset found that trust in CDC and FDA is 64.6% and 62.5%, respectively [ 30 ]. Previous evidence indicates for-profit sources, like the tobacco industry, can result in significantly lower believability by source [ 18 , 19 , 31 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

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

Jarman

Kowitt

Ross

et al. 2017

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Awareness and trust of the FDA and CDC: Results from a national sample of US adults and adolescents

Cited by 66 publications

References 27 publications

Information to Improve Public Perceptions of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA’s) Tobacco Regulatory Role

Information to Improve Public Perceptions of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA’s) Tobacco Regulatory Role

Determinants of trust in the flu vaccine for African Americans and Whites

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About