Aerosol, vapor, or chemicals? College student perceptions of harm from electronic cigarettes and support for a tobacco-free campus policy.
J Am Coll Health
; 70(6): 1754-1760, 2022.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-32931725
ABSTRACT
Objective:
This study is the first to examine the influence of e-cigarette emission phrasing on perceived harm of secondhand exposure, and whether harm perception was associated with support for a tobacco-free campus policy.Participants:
In the fall 2018 and spring 2019 semesters, 52 sections of a college English course (N = 791 students) were cluster randomized to one of three conditions ("vapor," "aerosol," or "chemicals") assessing harm of secondhand exposure to e-cigarette emissions.Methods:
Regression models adjusted for demographic characteristics, tobacco use, and other potential confounders.Results:
Compared to the "vapor" condition, "chemicals" and "aerosol" conditions were associated with increased odds of perceiving secondhand exposure to e-cigarettes to be harmful/very harmful (AOR = 2.0, p < 0.01). Greater perceived harm of secondhand e-cigarette exposure was associated with increased odds of supporting a tobacco-free campus policy (AOR = 2.22, p < 0.001).Conclusions:
Health campaigns should use accurate terminology to describe e-cigarette emissions, rather than jargon that conveys lower risk.Palavras-chave
Texto completo:
1
Coleções:
01-internacional
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Assunto principal:
Estudantes
/
Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco
/
Conhecimentos, Atitudes e Prática em Saúde
/
Política Antifumo
/
Sistemas Eletrônicos de Liberação de Nicotina
Tipo de estudo:
Clinical_trials
/
Prognostic_studies
Limite:
Humans
Idioma:
En
Revista:
J Am Coll Health
Ano de publicação:
2022
Tipo de documento:
Article
País de afiliação:
Estados Unidos