Title |
Is Consumer Response to Plain/Standardised Tobacco Packaging Consistent with Framework Convention on Tobacco Control Guidelines? A Systematic Review of Quantitative Studies
|
---|---|
Published in |
PLOS ONE, October 2013
|
DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0075919 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Martine Stead, Crawford Moodie, Kathryn Angus, Linda Bauld, Ann McNeill, James Thomas, Gerard Hastings, Kate Hinds, Alison O'Mara-Eves, Irene Kwan, Richard I. Purves, Stuart L. Bryce |
Abstract |
Standardised or 'plain' tobacco packaging was introduced in Australia in December 2012 and is currently being considered in other countries. The primary objective of this systematic review was to locate, assess and synthesise published and grey literature relating to the potential impacts of standardised tobacco packaging as proposed by the guidelines for the international Framework Convention on Tobacco Control: reduced appeal, increased salience and effectiveness of health warnings, and more accurate perceptions of product strength and harm. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 8 | 24% |
Australia | 6 | 18% |
New Zealand | 2 | 6% |
Hong Kong | 1 | 3% |
Uganda | 1 | 3% |
Chile | 1 | 3% |
United States | 1 | 3% |
Mexico | 1 | 3% |
Unknown | 13 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 22 | 65% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 6 | 18% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 3 | 9% |
Scientists | 3 | 9% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Germany | 1 | <1% |
United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
Singapore | 1 | <1% |
United States | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 128 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 26 | 20% |
Researcher | 15 | 11% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 11% |
Student > Bachelor | 13 | 10% |
Student > Postgraduate | 8 | 6% |
Other | 33 | 25% |
Unknown | 23 | 17% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Medicine and Dentistry | 21 | 16% |
Social Sciences | 16 | 12% |
Psychology | 16 | 12% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 5% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 7 | 5% |
Other | 30 | 23% |
Unknown | 36 | 27% |