Association Between Cigarette and Bidi Purchase Behavior (Loose vs Pack) and Health Warning Label Exposure: Findings From the Tobacco Control Policy India Survey and In-Depth Interviews With People Who Smoke
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The sale of loose cigarettes or bidis can undermine the purpose of requiring health warning labels (HWLs) on cigarette packs and bidi bundles by diminishing their visibility and legibility. OBJECTIVE: This mixed-methods study aims to examine the association between purchase behavior (loose vs pack or bundle), HWL exposure, and responses to HWLs among Indian adults who smoke. METHODS: Data were analyzed from the 2018-2019 India Tobacco Control Policy Survey and from 28 in-depth interviews conducted with Indian adults who smoked in 2022. The Tobacco Control Policy Survey sample included tobacco users who bought cigarettes (n=643) or bidis (n=730), either loose or in packs or bundles at their last purchase. Ordinal regression models were fit separately for cigarettes and bidis, whereby HWL variables (noticing HWLs, reading and looking closely at HWLs, forgoing a cigarette or bidi because of HWLs, thinking about health risks of smoking, and thinking about quitting smoking cigarettes or bidis because of HWLs) were regressed on last purchase (loose vs packs or bundles). In-depth interviews with participants from Delhi and Mumbai who purchased loose cigarettes in the last month were conducted, and thematic analysis was used to analyze the interview data. RESULTS: Survey findings indicated that about 74.3% (478/643) of cigarette users and 11.8% (86/730) of bidi users reported having bought loose sticks at their last purchase. Those who purchased loose cigarettes (vs packs) noticed HWLs less often (estimate -0.830, 95% CI -1.197 to -0.463, P<.001), whereas those who purchased loose bidis (vs bundles) read and looked closely at HWLs (estimate 0.646, 95% CI 0.013-1.279, P=.046), thought about the harms of bidi smoking (estimate 1.200, 95% CI 0.597-1.802, P<.001), and thought about quitting bidi smoking (estimate 0.871, 95% CI 0.282-1.461, P=.004) more often. Interview findings indicated lower exposure to HWLs among those who purchased loose cigarettes, primarily due to vendors distributing loose cigarettes without showing the original cigarette pack, storing them in separate containers, and consumers' preference for foreign-made cigarette brands, which often lack HWLs. While participants were generally aware of the contents of HWLs, many deliberately avoided them when purchasing loose cigarettes. In addition, they believed that loose cigarette purchases reduced the HWLs' potential to deliver consistent reminders about the harmful effects of cigarette smoking due to reduced exposure, an effect more common among those who purchased packs. Participants also noted that vendors, especially small ones, did not display statutory health warnings at their point of sale, further limiting exposure to warning messages. CONCLUSIONS: Survey and interview findings indicated that those who purchased loose cigarettes noticed HWLs less often. Loose purchases likely decrease the frequency of exposure to HWLs' reminders about the harmful effects of smoking, potentially reducing the effectiveness of HWLs.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».