Erin A Vogel, Alayna P Tackett, Jennifer B Unger, Maria J Gonzalez, Natalia Peraza, Nikki S Jafarzadeh, Michelle K Page, Maciej L Goniewicz, Melissa Wong, Adam M Leventhal
{"title":"风味和改良风险声明对使用可吸入尼古丁和烟草制品的年轻人尼古丁袋认知和使用意向的影响：随机对照试验。","authors":"Erin A Vogel, Alayna P Tackett, Jennifer B Unger, Maria J Gonzalez, Natalia Peraza, Nikki S Jafarzadeh, Michelle K Page, Maciej L Goniewicz, Melissa Wong, Adam M Leventhal","doi":"10.1136/tc-2023-058382","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Availability of flavours and potential modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims may influence young adults' (YAs') perceptions of and intentions to use nicotine pouches ('pouches').</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>YAs aged 21-34 years (N=47, <i>M</i> <sub>age</sub>=24.5, <i>SD</i>=3.1) with past-month nicotine/tobacco use (10.6% cigarette-only, 51.1% e-cigarette-only, 38.3% dual use) and no intention to quit were randomised to self-administer four Zyn 3 mg nicotine pouches in a 4 (flavour; within-subjects: smooth, mint, menthol, citrus) × 2 (MRTP claim on packaging; between subjects: present or absent) mixed-factorial design. After self-administering each pouch, participants reported appeal, use intentions and perceived harm compared with cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Three mixed-factorial analysis of variances (ANOVAs) examined main and interactive effects of flavour and MRTP claim on appeal, use intentions and comparative harm perceptions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mint (<i>M</i>=55.9, <i>SD</i>=26.4), menthol (<i>M</i>=49.7, <i>SD</i>=26.8) and citrus (<i>M</i>=46.6, <i>SD</i>=24.8) flavours were significantly more appealing than smooth (<i>M</i>=37.6, <i>SD</i>=25.4; p<0.001). MRTP claim did not significantly affect product appeal (p=0.376). Use intentions were greater for mint (<i>M</i>=2.6, <i>SD</i>=1.3) and menthol (<i>M</i>=2.0, <i>SD</i>=1.1) flavours than smooth (<i>M</i>=1.8, <i>SD</i>=1.0; p=0.002). Flavour did not affect comparative harm perceptions (p values>0.418). MRTP claims increased use intention (p=0.032) and perceptions of pouches as less harmful than cigarettes (p=0.011), but did not affect perceived harm relative to e-cigarettes (p=0.142). Flavour × MRTP claim interactions were not significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Flavoured (vs smooth) pouches were more appealing to YAs. MRTP claims reduced perceived harm of pouches compared with cigarettes; however, intentions to switch were low. To protect YAs' health, regulatory restrictions could target flavours and MRTP claims.</p>","PeriodicalId":23145,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Control","volume":" ","pages":"315-322"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11199376/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effects of flavour and modified risk claims on nicotine pouch perceptions and use intentions among young adults who use inhalable nicotine and tobacco products: a randomised controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Erin A Vogel, Alayna P Tackett, Jennifer B Unger, Maria J Gonzalez, Natalia Peraza, Nikki S Jafarzadeh, Michelle K Page, Maciej L Goniewicz, Melissa Wong, Adam M Leventhal\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/tc-2023-058382\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Availability of flavours and potential modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims may influence young adults' (YAs') perceptions of and intentions to use nicotine pouches ('pouches').</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>YAs aged 21-34 years (N=47, <i>M</i> <sub>age</sub>=24.5, <i>SD</i>=3.1) with past-month nicotine/tobacco use (10.6% cigarette-only, 51.1% e-cigarette-only, 38.3% dual use) and no intention to quit were randomised to self-administer four Zyn 3 mg nicotine pouches in a 4 (flavour; within-subjects: smooth, mint, menthol, citrus) × 2 (MRTP claim on packaging; between subjects: present or absent) mixed-factorial design. After self-administering each pouch, participants reported appeal, use intentions and perceived harm compared with cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Three mixed-factorial analysis of variances (ANOVAs) examined main and interactive effects of flavour and MRTP claim on appeal, use intentions and comparative harm perceptions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Mint (<i>M</i>=55.9, <i>SD</i>=26.4), menthol (<i>M</i>=49.7, <i>SD</i>=26.8) and citrus (<i>M</i>=46.6, <i>SD</i>=24.8) flavours were significantly more appealing than smooth (<i>M</i>=37.6, <i>SD</i>=25.4; p<0.001). MRTP claim did not significantly affect product appeal (p=0.376). Use intentions were greater for mint (<i>M</i>=2.6, <i>SD</i>=1.3) and menthol (<i>M</i>=2.0, <i>SD</i>=1.1) flavours than smooth (<i>M</i>=1.8, <i>SD</i>=1.0; p=0.002). Flavour did not affect comparative harm perceptions (p values>0.418). MRTP claims increased use intention (p=0.032) and perceptions of pouches as less harmful than cigarettes (p=0.011), but did not affect perceived harm relative to e-cigarettes (p=0.142). Flavour × MRTP claim interactions were not significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Flavoured (vs smooth) pouches were more appealing to YAs. MRTP claims reduced perceived harm of pouches compared with cigarettes; however, intentions to switch were low. To protect YAs' health, regulatory restrictions could target flavours and MRTP claims.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23145,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Tobacco Control\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"315-322\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11199376/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Tobacco Control\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/tc-2023-058382\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Control","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/tc-2023-058382","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Effects of flavour and modified risk claims on nicotine pouch perceptions and use intentions among young adults who use inhalable nicotine and tobacco products: a randomised controlled trial.
Background: Availability of flavours and potential modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) claims may influence young adults' (YAs') perceptions of and intentions to use nicotine pouches ('pouches').
Methods: YAs aged 21-34 years (N=47, Mage=24.5, SD=3.1) with past-month nicotine/tobacco use (10.6% cigarette-only, 51.1% e-cigarette-only, 38.3% dual use) and no intention to quit were randomised to self-administer four Zyn 3 mg nicotine pouches in a 4 (flavour; within-subjects: smooth, mint, menthol, citrus) × 2 (MRTP claim on packaging; between subjects: present or absent) mixed-factorial design. After self-administering each pouch, participants reported appeal, use intentions and perceived harm compared with cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Three mixed-factorial analysis of variances (ANOVAs) examined main and interactive effects of flavour and MRTP claim on appeal, use intentions and comparative harm perceptions.
Results: Mint (M=55.9, SD=26.4), menthol (M=49.7, SD=26.8) and citrus (M=46.6, SD=24.8) flavours were significantly more appealing than smooth (M=37.6, SD=25.4; p<0.001). MRTP claim did not significantly affect product appeal (p=0.376). Use intentions were greater for mint (M=2.6, SD=1.3) and menthol (M=2.0, SD=1.1) flavours than smooth (M=1.8, SD=1.0; p=0.002). Flavour did not affect comparative harm perceptions (p values>0.418). MRTP claims increased use intention (p=0.032) and perceptions of pouches as less harmful than cigarettes (p=0.011), but did not affect perceived harm relative to e-cigarettes (p=0.142). Flavour × MRTP claim interactions were not significant.
Conclusions: Flavoured (vs smooth) pouches were more appealing to YAs. MRTP claims reduced perceived harm of pouches compared with cigarettes; however, intentions to switch were low. To protect YAs' health, regulatory restrictions could target flavours and MRTP claims.
期刊介绍：
Tobacco Control is an international peer-reviewed journal covering the nature and consequences of tobacco use worldwide; tobacco''s effects on population health, the economy, the environment, and society; efforts to prevent and control the global tobacco epidemic through population-level education and policy changes; the ethical dimensions of tobacco control policies; and the activities of the tobacco industry and its allies.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
