估算香烟过滤嘴通气量对过去 30 天吸烟量的因果效应。

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Anne A Eaton, Dorothy K Hatsukami, Irina Stepanov, Peter G Shields, Dana Mowls Carroll
{"title":"估算香烟过滤嘴通气量对过去 30 天吸烟量的因果效应。","authors":"Anne A Eaton, Dorothy K Hatsukami, Irina Stepanov, Peter G Shields, Dana Mowls Carroll","doi":"10.1093/ntr/ntae191","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Cigarettes with higher levels of filter ventilation (FV) are misperceived as less harmful and may be more appealing to consumers. Setting limits on FV has been considered as a policy, but a better understanding of any potential unintended consequences is needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>FV (0.2%-61.1%) measured for 114 subbrands was merged with Wave 1 (2012-2013) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco Use and Health (PATH) data, restricted to adults 25+ years of age who smoked daily, and examined by quartiles. Inverse probability of exposure weights were used to estimate the causal effect of FV on past 30-day smoking at subsequent waves while accounting for potential confounders including demographics, menthol, heaviness of smoking, and past quit attempts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to those in the first (lowest) quartile of FV, those in the second, third, and fourth quartiles had 1.02 (95% confidence interval = 0.57, 1.82), 0.86 (0.42, 1.73), and 1.52 (0.90, 2.56) times the odds of no past 30-day smoking at Wave 2 (approximately 1 year later, p = .163), and 1.28 (0.80, 2.07), 1.11 (0.67, 1.83), and 1.65 (1.01, 1.24) times the odds of no past 30-day smoking at Wave 4 (3 years later, p = .238).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This observational study found no strong evidence of a causal effect of FV on past 30-day smoking at approximately 1 and 3 years follow-up. However, our effect size estimates were not precise and thus an increase in the ability to quit smoking due to higher FV levels cannot be ruled out.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>Setting a maximum limit on FV in cigarettes could address the misperception that highly ventilated cigarettes are less harmful and the link between FV and lung adenocarcinoma. It is important to understand whether such a policy would have unintended consequences on longer-term smoking behavior. We found no strong evidence that FV affects past 30-day smoking 1-3 years later, but could not rule out the possibility that higher FV increases cessation rates. If future studies confirm these epidemiologic findings, this could mean that setting a limit on FV would not lead to reductions in the ability to quit smoking.</p>","PeriodicalId":19241,"journal":{"name":"Nicotine & Tobacco Research","volume":" ","pages":"192-198"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Estimating the Causal Effect of Filter Ventilation Levels in Cigarettes on Past 30-Day Smoking.\",\"authors\":\"Anne A Eaton, Dorothy K Hatsukami, Irina Stepanov, Peter G Shields, Dana Mowls Carroll\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/ntr/ntae191\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Cigarettes with higher levels of filter ventilation (FV) are misperceived as less harmful and may be more appealing to consumers. Setting limits on FV has been considered as a policy, but a better understanding of any potential unintended consequences is needed.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>FV (0.2%-61.1%) measured for 114 subbrands was merged with Wave 1 (2012-2013) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco Use and Health (PATH) data, restricted to adults 25+ years of age who smoked daily, and examined by quartiles. Inverse probability of exposure weights were used to estimate the causal effect of FV on past 30-day smoking at subsequent waves while accounting for potential confounders including demographics, menthol, heaviness of smoking, and past quit attempts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to those in the first (lowest) quartile of FV, those in the second, third, and fourth quartiles had 1.02 (95% confidence interval = 0.57, 1.82), 0.86 (0.42, 1.73), and 1.52 (0.90, 2.56) times the odds of no past 30-day smoking at Wave 2 (approximately 1 year later, p = .163), and 1.28 (0.80, 2.07), 1.11 (0.67, 1.83), and 1.65 (1.01, 1.24) times the odds of no past 30-day smoking at Wave 4 (3 years later, p = .238).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This observational study found no strong evidence of a causal effect of FV on past 30-day smoking at approximately 1 and 3 years follow-up. However, our effect size estimates were not precise and thus an increase in the ability to quit smoking due to higher FV levels cannot be ruled out.</p><p><strong>Implications: </strong>Setting a maximum limit on FV in cigarettes could address the misperception that highly ventilated cigarettes are less harmful and the link between FV and lung adenocarcinoma. It is important to understand whether such a policy would have unintended consequences on longer-term smoking behavior. We found no strong evidence that FV affects past 30-day smoking 1-3 years later, but could not rule out the possibility that higher FV increases cessation rates. If future studies confirm these epidemiologic findings, this could mean that setting a limit on FV would not lead to reductions in the ability to quit smoking.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19241,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nicotine & Tobacco Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"192-198\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nicotine & Tobacco Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntae191\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nicotine & Tobacco Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ntr/ntae191","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:过滤嘴通气量较高的香烟被误认为危害较小,可能对消费者更有吸引力。对过滤嘴通气量设定限制已被视为一项政策,但需要更好地了解任何潜在的意外后果:将114个子品牌的过滤嘴通气量(0.2-61.1%)与第一波(2012-2013年)烟草使用和健康人群评估(PATH)数据合并,仅限于25岁以上每天吸烟的成年人,并按四分位数进行研究。在考虑人口统计学、薄荷醇、吸烟量和过去的戒烟尝试等潜在混杂因素的情况下,使用暴露的逆概率加权法估算过滤嘴通风对后续波次中过去30天吸烟量的因果效应:与过滤嘴通风量第一四分位数(最低)的吸烟者相比,第二、第三和第四四分位数的吸烟者过去 30 天不吸烟的几率分别是第一四分位数的 1.02 倍(95% 置信区间:0.57, 1.82)、0.86 倍(0.42, 1.73)和 1.52 倍(0.90, 2.56)。在第 2 波(约 1 年后,p=0.163),过去 30 天不吸烟的几率分别为 1.28(0.80,2.07)、1.11(0.67,1.83)和 1.65(1.01,1.24)倍;在第 4 波(3 年后,p=0.238),过去 30 天不吸烟的几率分别为 1.02(95 置信区间:0.57,1.82)、0.86(0.42,1.73)和 1.52(0.90,2.56)倍:这项观察性研究没有发现强有力的证据表明,在大约 1 年和 3 年的随访中,过滤式通风对过去 30 天内不吸烟有因果影响。然而,我们对效应大小的估计并不精确,因此不能排除过滤嘴通气量越高,戒烟能力越强的可能性:为香烟中的过滤嘴通气量(FV)设定上限,可以解决认为高通气量香烟危害较小的误解,以及过滤嘴通气量与肺腺癌之间的联系。重要的是要了解这样的政策是否会对长期吸烟行为产生意想不到的后果。我们没有发现强有力的证据表明全氟辛烷值会影响 1-3 年后过去 30 天的吸烟情况,但不能排除全氟辛烷值越高戒烟率越高的可能性。如果未来的研究证实了这些流行病学发现,这可能意味着对FV设限不会导致戒烟能力下降。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Estimating the Causal Effect of Filter Ventilation Levels in Cigarettes on Past 30-Day Smoking.

Introduction: Cigarettes with higher levels of filter ventilation (FV) are misperceived as less harmful and may be more appealing to consumers. Setting limits on FV has been considered as a policy, but a better understanding of any potential unintended consequences is needed.

Methods: FV (0.2%-61.1%) measured for 114 subbrands was merged with Wave 1 (2012-2013) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco Use and Health (PATH) data, restricted to adults 25+ years of age who smoked daily, and examined by quartiles. Inverse probability of exposure weights were used to estimate the causal effect of FV on past 30-day smoking at subsequent waves while accounting for potential confounders including demographics, menthol, heaviness of smoking, and past quit attempts.

Results: Compared to those in the first (lowest) quartile of FV, those in the second, third, and fourth quartiles had 1.02 (95% confidence interval = 0.57, 1.82), 0.86 (0.42, 1.73), and 1.52 (0.90, 2.56) times the odds of no past 30-day smoking at Wave 2 (approximately 1 year later, p = .163), and 1.28 (0.80, 2.07), 1.11 (0.67, 1.83), and 1.65 (1.01, 1.24) times the odds of no past 30-day smoking at Wave 4 (3 years later, p = .238).

Conclusions: This observational study found no strong evidence of a causal effect of FV on past 30-day smoking at approximately 1 and 3 years follow-up. However, our effect size estimates were not precise and thus an increase in the ability to quit smoking due to higher FV levels cannot be ruled out.

Implications: Setting a maximum limit on FV in cigarettes could address the misperception that highly ventilated cigarettes are less harmful and the link between FV and lung adenocarcinoma. It is important to understand whether such a policy would have unintended consequences on longer-term smoking behavior. We found no strong evidence that FV affects past 30-day smoking 1-3 years later, but could not rule out the possibility that higher FV increases cessation rates. If future studies confirm these epidemiologic findings, this could mean that setting a limit on FV would not lead to reductions in the ability to quit smoking.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Nicotine & Tobacco Research
Nicotine & Tobacco Research 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
10.60%
发文量
268
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Nicotine & Tobacco Research is one of the world''s few peer-reviewed journals devoted exclusively to the study of nicotine and tobacco. It aims to provide a forum for empirical findings, critical reviews, and conceptual papers on the many aspects of nicotine and tobacco, including research from the biobehavioral, neurobiological, molecular biologic, epidemiological, prevention, and treatment arenas. Along with manuscripts from each of the areas mentioned above, the editors encourage submissions that are integrative in nature and that cross traditional disciplinary boundaries. The journal is sponsored by the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco (SRNT). It publishes twelve times a year.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信