Targeted Versus Nontargeted Communication About Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems in Three Smoker Groups

Yang, Bo; Liu, Jiaying; Popova, Lucy

doi:10.3390/ijerph15102071

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…After removal of duplicates and publications that did not meet the inclusion criteria, a total of 31 articles were included [7,8,24–28,34–57] (Table 3) reporting results from studies involving a total of 52 425 participants (ranging from 95–16 051). Twenty‐six of the included studies were experiments and the remaining were cross‐sectional surveys.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A study exploring the impact of a public education campaign about relative safety of NVPs reported that the intervention was associated with an increase in smoker motivation to quit [49]. Two studies found no association between message exposure (a targeted message stratified by smoker group [52] and a nicotine education message [37]) and smoker intention to quit smoking. Exposure to relative risk messages (compared to control conditions such as a bottled water advert) was associated with higher intentions among smokers to switch from smoking to vaping [35,54].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does the content and source credibility of health and risk messages related to nicotine vaping products have an impact on harm perception and behavioural intentions? A systematic review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims To systematically review the literature on (i) whether and how various risk messages about nicotine vaping products (NVPs) alter harm perception and behavioural intentions of smokers and non‐smokers and (ii) how trust in sources of NVP risk communication affects message reception and behavioural intentions. Methods Seven electronic databases and reference lists of relevant articles were searched for articles published up to April 2020. Experimental and quasi‐experimental studies on message effects and cross‐sectional studies on source credibility were included. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale and the Evidence Project Risk of Bias Tool were used to assess the quality of observational and intervention studies, respectively. For each outcome variable, we indicated whether there was an effect (as a ‘yes’ or ‘no’) and used effect direction plots to display information on the direction of effects. Results Nicotine addiction messages resulted in greater health and addiction risk perceptions, relative risk messages comparing the health risks of NVPs to cigarette smoking increased the perception that NVPs are less harmful than combustible cigarettes, and a nicotine fact sheet corrected misperceptions of nicotine and NVPs. Smokers’ intention to purchase, try or switch to NVPs was higher when exposed to a relative risk message and lower when exposed to nicotine addiction warnings. Trust in NVP risk information from public health agencies was associated with lower odds of; (i) NVP use and (ii) perceiving NVPs as less harmful, whereas those who trusted information from NVP companies were more likely to perceive NVPs as less harmful than combustible cigarettes. Conclusions Relative risk messages may help improve the accuracy of harm perceptions of nicotine vaping products and increase smokers’ intentions to quit smoking and/or to switch to vaping, although the literature is nascent.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%