Tobacco Use, Risk Perceptions, and Characteristics of Adults Who Used a Heated Tobacco Product (IQOS) in the United States: Cross-Sectional Survey Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Tobacco Heating System (THS; commercialized as IQOS) is a smoke-free heated tobacco product introduced in the United States in 2019 and authorized by the US Food and Drug Administration as a modified risk tobacco product (MRTP) in 2020. THS consists of a holder and specially designed tobacco sticks that are heated instead of burned to produce a nicotine-containing aerosol. THS was available in Atlanta, Georgia; Richmond, Virginia; Charlotte, North Carolina; the Northern Virginia region; and South Carolina before its market removal in November 2021. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to describe selected sociodemographic characteristics and self-reported health history of adults who used IQOS (AUIs), their tobacco use patterns (eg, tobacco use history, exclusive and dual-use, and switching from cigarette smoking), their risk perceptions of the product, and their understanding of MRTP messages. METHODS: The IQOS Cross-Sectional Postmarket Adult Consumer Study was a study of AUIs aged 21 years or older who were recruited from a consumer database via direct postal mail and emails. Participants completed the online survey between September and November 2021. RESULTS: The survey was completed by 645 current and 43 former AUIs who had used at least 100 tobacco sticks (considered established THS use) before the assessment. Of the 688 participants, 424 (61.6%) were male, 502 (73.0%) were non-Hispanic White, and the mean age was 45 years. The vast majority (680/688, 98.8%) of AUIs had ever smoked combusted cigarettes before first trying THS and 628 (91.3%) had smoked cigarettes in the 30 days before first using THS. At the time of assessment, 161 (23.4%) reported using e-cigarettes (vs 229, 33.3%, before THS use), 92 (13.4%) reported smoking cigars (vs 114, 16.6%, before THS use), and 338 (49.1%) were still smoking after an average of 1 year of THS use. Among those currently using THS who were still smoking (n=298), 249 (83.6%) smoked fewer cigarettes compared with before first trying THS; 362 of 688 (52.6%) AUIs reported having no physical health conditions evaluated in this study and almost three-quarters reported having no mental health conditions. Among all AUIs, over 563 (81.8%) had never used a cessation treatment or had not used it in the past 12 months, and 555 (80.7%) AUIs demonstrated a correct understanding of the MRTP message and AUIs perceived THS as having a lower risk than cigarettes (43.8 vs 64.4 on a 100-point composite score scale). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence that THS can help adult smokers in the United States completely switch away from cigarettes or reduce smoking.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".