Trial Outcomes & Findings for Responses to E-cigarette Message Source and Presentation (NCT NCT06274723)
NCT ID: NCT06274723
Last Updated: 2026-01-14
Results Overview
Participants' self-reported message acceptance were measured by using a five-point Likert scale using five items assessing whether participants thought the message was worth remembering, grabbed their attention, powerful, convincing, and meaningful on a scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score, and this was done for each arm for each vaping status. Higher scores indicate more more message acceptance, therefore better outcomes.
COMPLETED
NA
848 participants
After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
2026-01-14
Participant Flow
n=109 data were removed from analysis; if 1) study duration was less than the average study duration (i.e., 8 minutes; n=44, if the participant age exceeded the eligible age (n=19); and if non-vapers did not meet the susceptibility criteria (n=46).
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
209
|
208
|
210
|
210
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
191
|
197
|
203
|
194
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
18
|
11
|
7
|
16
|
Reasons for withdrawal
Withdrawal data not reported
Baseline Characteristics
Responses to E-cigarette Message Source and Presentation
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
n=191 Participants
Participants first saw a brief description of a expert source. Then they viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
n=197 Participants
Participants first saw a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
n=203 Participants
Participants first saw a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
n=194 Participants
Participants first saw a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Total
n=785 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
22.04 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.79 • n=14 Participants
|
21.78 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.77 • n=10 Participants
|
21.88 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.69 • n=24 Participants
|
21.85 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.83 • n=78 Participants
|
21.89 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.77 • n=713 Participants
|
|
Sex/Gender, Customized
Female
|
89 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
101 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
92 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
88 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
370 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Sex/Gender, Customized
Male
|
93 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
83 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
101 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
92 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
369 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Sex/Gender, Customized
Others
|
9 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
13 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
10 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
14 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
46 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
|
23 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
24 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
29 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
26 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
102 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
|
168 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
173 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
174 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
168 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
683 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
0 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
|
1 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
5 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
|
21 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
20 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
18 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
22 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
81 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
|
1 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
3 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
|
43 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
50 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
49 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
53 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
195 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
|
97 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
96 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
98 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
88 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
379 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
|
10 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
16 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
8 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
13 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
47 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
|
18 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
15 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
27 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
15 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
75 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Region of Enrollment
United States
|
191 participants
n=14 Participants
|
197 participants
n=10 Participants
|
203 participants
n=24 Participants
|
194 participants
n=78 Participants
|
785 participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Vaping status
Current vapers
|
103 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
112 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
115 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
100 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
430 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Vaping status
Susceptible non-vapers
|
79 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
74 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
74 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
82 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
309 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
|
Vaping status
Others
|
9 Participants
n=14 Participants
|
11 Participants
n=10 Participants
|
14 Participants
n=24 Participants
|
12 Participants
n=78 Participants
|
46 Participants
n=713 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.Population: The data were stratified based on participants' vaping status ("Current vapers" and "Susceptible non-vapers"). The Number of Participants Analyzed for each row reflects the actual number of participants within that vaping status group who were included in the analysis. The Overall Number of Participants Analyzed represents the total number of both subgroups. Any differences have been clarified to specify participant numbers at the row level.
Participants' self-reported message acceptance were measured by using a five-point Likert scale using five items assessing whether participants thought the message was worth remembering, grabbed their attention, powerful, convincing, and meaningful on a scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score, and this was done for each arm for each vaping status. Higher scores indicate more more message acceptance, therefore better outcomes.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
n=186 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
n=189 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Message Acceptance
Current vapers
|
3.01 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.01
|
3.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.01
|
2.88 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.01
|
2.76 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.01
|
|
Message Acceptance
Susceptible non-vapers
|
2.94 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.09
|
2.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.03
|
2.77 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.09
|
2.72 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.09
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.Population: The data were stratified based on participants' vaping status ("Current vapers" and "Susceptible non-vapers"). The Number of Participants Analyzed for each row reflects the actual number of participants within that vaping status group who were included in the analysis. The Overall Number of Participants Analyzed represents the total number of both subgroups. Any differences have been clarified to specify participant numbers at the row level.
Harm perceptions was measured by a single item e-cigarette harm perceptions question assessing participants' perceived absolute harm of e-cigarette use on a scale from 1 (Not at all harmful) to 10 (Very harmful). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater vaping harm perceptions, therefore indicating better outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
n=186 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
n=189 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Harm Perceptions
Current vapers
|
7.39 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.20
|
7.45 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.19
|
7.27 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.19
|
7.44 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.20
|
|
Harm Perceptions
Susceptible non-vapers
|
8.05 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.19
|
8.04 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.20
|
8.04 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.20
|
7.82 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.19
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.Population: The data were stratified based on participants' vaping status ("Current vapers" and "Susceptible non-vapers"). The Number of Participants Analyzed for each row reflects the actual number of participants within that vaping status group who were included in the analysis. The Overall Number of Participants Analyzed represents the total number of both subgroups. Any differences have been clarified to specify participant numbers at the row level.
Negative cognition was measured by six-item reactance questionnaire, such as perceptions of messages being manipulative, misleading, distorted, overblown, exaggerated, and overstated on a scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). Higher scores indicate greater negative cognition, indicating worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
n=186 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
n=189 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Negative Cognition
Current vapers
|
3.79 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
3.81 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
3.87 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
3.78 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
|
Negative Cognition
Susceptible non-vapers
|
4.00 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
4.17 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.09
|
4.12 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.09
|
4.12 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.Population: The data were stratified based on participants' vaping status ("Current vapers" and "Susceptible non-vapers"). The Number of Participants Analyzed for each row reflects the actual number of participants within that vaping status group who were included in the analysis. The Overall Number of Participants Analyzed represents the total number of both subgroups. Any differences have been clarified to specify participant numbers at the row level.
Message anger was measured by four item message anger question assessing the extent to which the messages made participants feel irritated, angry, annoyed, and aggravated on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). Items were summed and averaged. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater anger toward messages, indicating worse outcomes.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
n=186 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
n=189 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Message Anger
Current vapers
|
4.07 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
4.12 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
4.19 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
4.05 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
|
Message Anger
Susceptible non-vapers
|
4.42 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.07
|
4.57 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.07
|
4.54 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.07
|
4.56 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.07
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.Population: The data were stratified based on participants' vaping status ("Current vapers" and "Susceptible non-vapers"). The Number of Participants Analyzed for each row reflects the actual number of participants within that vaping status group who were included in the analysis. The Overall Number of Participants Analyzed represents the total number of both subgroups. Any differences have been clarified to specify participant numbers at the row level.
Message liking will be measured by a single-item liking of the message on scale from 1 (Dislike very much) to 5 (Like very much). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater message liking, therefore indicating better outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
n=186 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
n=189 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Message Liking
Current vapers
|
3.08 units on a scale
Standard Error 0.09
|
3.05 units on a scale
Standard Error 0.08
|
2.95 units on a scale
Standard Error 0.08
|
2.97 units on a scale
Standard Error 0.09
|
|
Message Liking
Susceptible non-vapers
|
3.03 units on a scale
Standard Error 0.07
|
2.97 units on a scale
Standard Error 0.07
|
3.02 units on a scale
Standard Error 0.07
|
3.00 units on a scale
Standard Error 0.07
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.Population: The data were stratified based on participants' vaping status ("Current vapers" and "Susceptible non-vapers"). The Number of Participants Analyzed for each row reflects the actual number of participants within that vaping status group who were included in the analysis. The Overall Number of Participants Analyzed represents the total number of both subgroups. Any differences have been clarified to specify participant numbers at the row level.
Source trust was measured by a single-item trust in health information source questionnaire, such as trust in source about vaping information on a scale from 1(Not at all) to 5 (Very much so). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater source trust, therefore indicating better outcome
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
n=186 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
n=189 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Source Trust
Current vapers
|
3.13 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.09
|
3.21 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
2.99 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
3.01 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.09
|
|
Source Trust
Susceptible non-vapers
|
3.27 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
3.32 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
3.01 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
2.96 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.08
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: After exposure to all messages (approximately up to 45 minutes), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.Population: The data were stratified based on participants' vaping status ("Current vapers" and "Susceptible non-vapers"). The Number of Participants Analyzed for each row reflects the actual number of participants within that vaping status group who were included in the analysis. The Overall Number of Participants Analyzed represents the total number of both subgroups. Any differences have been clarified to specify participant numbers at the row level.
Participants' self-reported vaping attitudes were measured by using a five-point bipolar scale using 7 subscale items assessing whether participants thought vaping was enjoyable, healthy, safe, fun, smart, cool, and attractive on a scale from 1 (negative attitudes) to 5 (positive attitudes). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score, and this was done for each arm for each vaping status. Higher scores indicate more positive e-cigarette attitudes, therefore worse outcomes.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
n=186 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
n=189 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Attitudes
Current vapers
|
2.57 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.76
|
2.66 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.81
|
2.73 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.83
|
2.61 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.8
|
|
Attitudes
Susceptible non-vapers
|
1.51 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.81
|
1.53 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.94
|
1.41 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.72
|
1.33 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.59
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: After exposure to all messages (approximately up to 45 minutes), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.Population: The data were stratified based on participants' vaping status ("Current vapers" and "Susceptible non-vapers"). The Number of Participants Analyzed for each row reflects the actual number of participants within that vaping status group who were included in the analysis. The Overall Number of Participants Analyzed represents the total number of both subgroups. Any differences have been clarified to specify participant numbers at the row level.
Participants' vaping or vaping trial intentions were measured by using a 3 subscale items assessing participants' intentions to vape: soon/anytime during the next year/would use offered by one of their best friends, on a scale from 1 (Definitely not) to 5 (Definitely yes). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater vaping intentions, therefore indicating worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Expert, One-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Expert, Two-Sided
n=186 Participants
Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an expert source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, One-Sided
n=189 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of a peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that discussed only the health harms of e-cigarette use. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
Peer, Two-Sided
n=182 Participants
Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition were first presented with a brief description of an peer source. They then viewed an e-cigarette message that acknowledged both the potential benefits of e-cigarette use and the associated health risks. This sequence was repeated 18 times during a single study visit.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Behavioral Intentions to Vape or Try Vaping
Current vapers
|
3.08 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.1
|
2.88 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.14
|
3.05 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.23
|
3.07 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.15
|
|
Behavioral Intentions to Vape or Try Vaping
Susceptible non-vapers
|
1.51 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.81
|
1.53 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.94
|
1.41 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.72
|
1.33 units on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.59
|
Adverse Events
Expert, One-sided
Expert, Two-sided
Peer, One-sided
Peer, Two-sided
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Donghee Nicole Lee, Assistant Professor
University of Hawaii Cancer Center
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place