Comparisons between young adult waterpipe smokers and nonsmokers' reactions to pictorial health warning labels in Lebanon: a randomized crossover experimental study.

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Health Education Research Pub Date : 2023-12-11 DOI:10.1093/her/cyad027
R Jebai, T Asfar, R Nakkash, S Chehab, M Schmidt, W Wu, Z Bursac, W Maziak
{"title":"Comparisons between young adult waterpipe smokers and nonsmokers' reactions to pictorial health warning labels in Lebanon: a randomized crossover experimental study.","authors":"R Jebai, T Asfar, R Nakkash, S Chehab, M Schmidt, W Wu, Z Bursac, W Maziak","doi":"10.1093/her/cyad027","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study compares the impact of pictorial health warning labels (HWLs) and their placements on waterpipe parts (device, tobacco and charcoal packages) on health communication outcomes between waterpipe smokers and nonsmokers in Lebanon. An online randomized crossover experimental study was conducted among young adults (n = 403, August 2021) who observed three conditions of HWLs: pictorial HWLs on the tobacco package, pictorial HWLs on all waterpipe's parts and text-only HWL on the tobacco package in random order. Participants completed post-exposure assessments of health communication outcomes after each image. Using linear mixed models, we examined the differences in the effect of HWL conditions on several outcomes (i.e. warning reactions) between waterpipe smokers and nonsmokers, controlling for confounders (i.e. age, sex). Nonsmokers reported greater attention (β = 0.54 [95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.82]), cognitive elaboration (0.31 [0.05-0.58]) and social interaction (0.41 [0.18-0.65]) for pictorial HWLs on the tobacco packages than text-only compared with smokers. Pictorial HWLs on three parts versus one part elicited higher cognitive reactions and perceived message effectiveness in nonsmokers compared with waterpipe smokers. These findings provide valuable information for policymakers about the potential of implementing HWLs specific to waterpipes to prevent their use among young adults and limit tobacco-related morbidity and mortality in Lebanon.</p>","PeriodicalId":48236,"journal":{"name":"Health Education Research","volume":" ","pages":"537-547"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10714039/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Education Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/her/cyad027","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study compares the impact of pictorial health warning labels (HWLs) and their placements on waterpipe parts (device, tobacco and charcoal packages) on health communication outcomes between waterpipe smokers and nonsmokers in Lebanon. An online randomized crossover experimental study was conducted among young adults (n = 403, August 2021) who observed three conditions of HWLs: pictorial HWLs on the tobacco package, pictorial HWLs on all waterpipe's parts and text-only HWL on the tobacco package in random order. Participants completed post-exposure assessments of health communication outcomes after each image. Using linear mixed models, we examined the differences in the effect of HWL conditions on several outcomes (i.e. warning reactions) between waterpipe smokers and nonsmokers, controlling for confounders (i.e. age, sex). Nonsmokers reported greater attention (β = 0.54 [95% confidence interval: 0.25-0.82]), cognitive elaboration (0.31 [0.05-0.58]) and social interaction (0.41 [0.18-0.65]) for pictorial HWLs on the tobacco packages than text-only compared with smokers. Pictorial HWLs on three parts versus one part elicited higher cognitive reactions and perceived message effectiveness in nonsmokers compared with waterpipe smokers. These findings provide valuable information for policymakers about the potential of implementing HWLs specific to waterpipes to prevent their use among young adults and limit tobacco-related morbidity and mortality in Lebanon.

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
比较黎巴嫩年轻成人水烟吸食者和非吸食者对图形健康警示标签的反应:一项随机交叉实验研究。
本研究比较了图形化健康警示标签(HWL)及其在水烟部件(烟嘴、烟草和木炭包装)上的位置对黎巴嫩水烟吸烟者和非吸烟者之间健康交流结果的影响。这项在线随机交叉实验研究的对象是年轻人(n = 403,2021 年 8 月),他们观察了三种情况下的健康知识标识:烟草包装上的图形化健康知识标识、水烟所有部件上的图形化健康知识标识和烟草包装上的纯文字健康知识标识,顺序随机。参与者在每张图片后完成健康传播效果的暴露后评估。通过线性混合模型,我们研究了在控制混杂因素(如年龄、性别)的情况下,HWL 条件对水烟吸烟者和非吸烟者的几种结果(即警示反应)的影响差异。与吸烟者相比,非吸烟者对烟草包装上的图形化健康警示的注意力(β = 0.54 [95% 置信区间:0.25-0.82])、认知阐述(0.31 [0.05-0.58])和社会互动(0.41 [0.18-0.65])均高于纯文字健康警示。与水烟吸烟者相比,烟草包装上三部分与一部分的图形化健康警示能引起非吸烟者更高的认知反应和感知信息的有效性。这些研究结果为政策制定者提供了宝贵的信息,使他们了解到实施专门针对水烟的健康警示的潜力,以防止青壮年使用水烟,并限制黎巴嫩与烟草相关的发病率和死亡率。
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
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊介绍: Publishing original, refereed papers, Health Education Research deals with all the vital issues involved in health education and promotion worldwide - providing a valuable link between the health education research and practice communities.
期刊最新文献
The outcome of diabetic retinopathy health education program in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a quasi-experimental study. The effect of motivational interview-based breastfeeding education on breastfeeding motivation, success, self-efficacy perceptions, and exclusive breastfeeding duration after cesarean section: a randomized controlled trial. Correction to: Examining the impact of a leisure time intervention on participation in organized out-of-school activities among adolescents: a quasi-experimental study in Franklin County, KY, USA. Breastfeeding interventions and programs conducted in the Islamic Republic of Iran: a scoping review. Associations between noticing public health education campaigns about cannabis and risk perceptions in the northern Canadian territories: a cross-sectional study.
×
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