The impacts of electronic cigarette health warning labels on use intentions and perceptions: A cross-sectional study of US and Israeli adults who use tobacco.

IF 1.6 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Journal of Public Health Research Pub Date : 2023-11-18 eCollection Date: 2023-10-01 DOI:10.1177/22799036231214396
Zongshuan Duan, Hagai Levine, Yael Bar-Zeev, Yuxian Cui, Cassidy R LoParco, Yan Wang, Lorien C Abroms, Amal Khayat, Carla J Berg
{"title":"The impacts of electronic cigarette health warning labels on use intentions and perceptions: A cross-sectional study of US and Israeli adults who use tobacco.","authors":"Zongshuan Duan, Hagai Levine, Yael Bar-Zeev, Yuxian Cui, Cassidy R LoParco, Yan Wang, Lorien C Abroms, Amal Khayat, Carla J Berg","doi":"10.1177/22799036231214396","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health warning labels (HWLs) are evidence-based tobacco control strategies; however, their application to e-cigarettes and related impacts (e.g. on perceived risk), including across countries with different regulations, are understudied.</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>Using 2021 survey data from 927 US and Israeli adults reporting past-month tobacco use, multivariate analyses examined: (1) sociodemographics in relation to self-reported impact of e-cigarette HWLs (i.e. more concerned about e-cigarette use, reassured, no effect) among those who noticed e-cigarette HWLs (multinomial regressions); and (2) HWL impacts in relation to use intentions and perceived addictiveness and harm (linear regressions).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among those who noticed HWLs (<i>n</i> = 835, 90.1%), 34.1% reported HWLs resulted in greater concern about e-cigarette use, 45.5% no effect, and 20.4% reassurance. Factors associated with greater concern (vs no effect) included e-cigarette non-use (vs use; aOR = 1.69, 95% CI:1.22, 2.38), US (vs Israel) resident (aOR = 1.65, 95% CI:1.16, 2.34), age 18-25 (vs 36-45; aOR = 1.72, 95% CI:1.11, 2.67), and more education (aOR = 1.85, 95% CI:1.30, 2.63). Factors associated with being reassured (vs no effect) included use of cigarettes (aOR = 1.71, 95% CI:1.06, 2.75), e-cigarettes (aOR = 2.64, 95% CI:1.77, 3.94), and other tobacco (aOR = 2.11, 95% CI:1.39, 3.21), and Israeli resident (aOR = 2.33, 95% CI:1.47, 3.70). Not noticing HWLs (vs no effect) correlated with lower intentions (β = -0.44, 95% CI:-0.87, -0.01), perceived addictiveness (β = -0.61, 95% CI:-1.05, -0.18), and harm (β = -0.56, 95% CI:-0.95, -0.18); reassurance correlated with greater use intentions (β = 0.48, 95% CI:0.12, 0.83); and greater concern was unassociated with use intentions or perceived risk.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Effects of differing e-cigarette HWLs in distinct subpopulations warrant research. Despite being noticed, they may have no effect or encourage e-cigarette use.</p>","PeriodicalId":45958,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Public Health Research","volume":"12 4","pages":"22799036231214396"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10666698/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Public Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/22799036231214396","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Health warning labels (HWLs) are evidence-based tobacco control strategies; however, their application to e-cigarettes and related impacts (e.g. on perceived risk), including across countries with different regulations, are understudied.

Design and methods: Using 2021 survey data from 927 US and Israeli adults reporting past-month tobacco use, multivariate analyses examined: (1) sociodemographics in relation to self-reported impact of e-cigarette HWLs (i.e. more concerned about e-cigarette use, reassured, no effect) among those who noticed e-cigarette HWLs (multinomial regressions); and (2) HWL impacts in relation to use intentions and perceived addictiveness and harm (linear regressions).

Results: Among those who noticed HWLs (n = 835, 90.1%), 34.1% reported HWLs resulted in greater concern about e-cigarette use, 45.5% no effect, and 20.4% reassurance. Factors associated with greater concern (vs no effect) included e-cigarette non-use (vs use; aOR = 1.69, 95% CI:1.22, 2.38), US (vs Israel) resident (aOR = 1.65, 95% CI:1.16, 2.34), age 18-25 (vs 36-45; aOR = 1.72, 95% CI:1.11, 2.67), and more education (aOR = 1.85, 95% CI:1.30, 2.63). Factors associated with being reassured (vs no effect) included use of cigarettes (aOR = 1.71, 95% CI:1.06, 2.75), e-cigarettes (aOR = 2.64, 95% CI:1.77, 3.94), and other tobacco (aOR = 2.11, 95% CI:1.39, 3.21), and Israeli resident (aOR = 2.33, 95% CI:1.47, 3.70). Not noticing HWLs (vs no effect) correlated with lower intentions (β = -0.44, 95% CI:-0.87, -0.01), perceived addictiveness (β = -0.61, 95% CI:-1.05, -0.18), and harm (β = -0.56, 95% CI:-0.95, -0.18); reassurance correlated with greater use intentions (β = 0.48, 95% CI:0.12, 0.83); and greater concern was unassociated with use intentions or perceived risk.

Conclusion: Effects of differing e-cigarette HWLs in distinct subpopulations warrant research. Despite being noticed, they may have no effect or encourage e-cigarette use.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
电子烟健康警告标签对使用意图和认知的影响:对美国和以色列使用烟草的成年人的横断面研究。
背景:健康警示标签(HWLs)是循证控烟策略;然而,它们在电子烟中的应用及其相关影响(例如对感知风险的影响),包括在不同法规的国家之间的应用,尚未得到充分研究。设计和方法:使用来自927名美国和以色列成年人报告过去一个月烟草使用情况的2021年调查数据,多变量分析检查了:(1)注意到电子烟HWLs的人与自我报告的电子烟HWLs影响(即更关注电子烟使用,放心,没有影响)相关的社会人口统计学(多项回归);(2) HWL对使用意图、感知成瘾和伤害的影响(线性回归)。结果:在注意到HWLs的人中(n = 835, 90.1%), 34.1%的人报告HWLs导致对电子烟使用的更大担忧,45.5%的人没有影响,20.4%的人放心。与更大的担忧(vs无影响)相关的因素包括不使用电子烟(vs使用;aOR = 1.69, 95% CI:1.22, 2.38),美国(vs以色列)居民(aOR = 1.65, 95% CI:1.16, 2.34),年龄18-25岁(vs 36-45岁;aOR = 1.72, 95% CI:1.11, 2.67),以及更多的教育(aOR = 1.85, 95% CI:1.30, 2.63)。与安心(vs无影响)相关的因素包括吸烟(aOR = 1.71, 95% CI:1.06, 2.75)、电子烟(aOR = 2.64, 95% CI:1.77, 3.94)和其他烟草(aOR = 2.11, 95% CI:1.39, 3.21)和以色列居民(aOR = 2.33, 95% CI:1.47, 3.70)。不注意HWLs (vs无影响)与较低的意图(β = -0.44, 95% CI:-0.87, -0.01)、感知成瘾(β = -0.61, 95% CI:-1.05, -0.18)和伤害(β = -0.56, 95% CI:-0.95, -0.18)相关;安心与更大的使用意图相关(β = 0.48, 95% CI:0.12, 0.83);更大的担忧与使用意图或感知风险无关。结论:不同电子烟HWLs对不同亚人群的影响值得研究。尽管被注意到了,但它们可能没有影响或鼓励电子烟的使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Public Health Research
Journal of Public Health Research PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.30%
发文量
116
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Public Health Research (JPHR) is an online Open Access, peer-reviewed journal in the field of public health science. The aim of the journal is to stimulate debate and dissemination of knowledge in the public health field in order to improve efficacy, effectiveness and efficiency of public health interventions to improve health outcomes of populations. This aim can only be achieved by adopting a global and multidisciplinary approach. The Journal of Public Health Research publishes contributions from both the “traditional'' disciplines of public health, including hygiene, epidemiology, health education, environmental health, occupational health, health policy, hospital management, health economics, law and ethics as well as from the area of new health care fields including social science, communication science, eHealth and mHealth philosophy, health technology assessment, genetics research implications, population-mental health, gender and disparity issues, global and migration-related themes. In support of this approach, JPHR strongly encourages the use of real multidisciplinary approaches and analyses in the manuscripts submitted to the journal. In addition to Original research, Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, Meta-synthesis and Perspectives and Debate articles, JPHR publishes newsworthy Brief Reports, Letters and Study Protocols related to public health and public health management activities.
期刊最新文献
Factors on medical clerkship students' quality of life: A survey study. Magseed preoperative localization in non-palpable breast lesions: Our single-center Breast Unit experience. Analyzing diversity trends in dermatology: A comprehensive overview. Reproducibility and explainability in digital pathology: The need to make black-box artificial intelligence systems more transparent. Healthcare students are faced with the issue of the rights of people with disabilities and the quality of services: Are we training future healthcare workers who overemphasize technology?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1