Zongshuan Duan, Hagai Levine, Yael Bar-Zeev, Yuxian Cui, Cassidy R LoParco, Yan Wang, Lorien C Abroms, Amal Khayat, Carla J Berg
{"title":"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。","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":null,"pages":null},"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":"{\"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\":null,\"pages\":null},\"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}","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}
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.
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.
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.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
