Longitudinal association between harm perceptions and tobacco behaviors among adults who smoke cigarettes: Differential associations across age groups using the PATH study.

INTRODUCTION: The relationship between e-cigarette and cigarette harm perceptions and tobacco behaviors may vary by age. We examined longitudinal associations of harm perceptions with tobacco use behaviors among adults who smoke cigarettes. METHODS: Data were from Waves 4 (2016-2018) and 5 (2018-2019) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health survey. Weighted multivariable logistic regressions identified independent associations between relative and absolute e-cigarette and cigarette harm perceptions at baseline and continued smoking, dual use, complete switching, and quit intention at follow-up, stratified by age (young adults [YAs] 18-24, middle-aged adults [MAs] 25-44, and older adults [OAs] ≥45) among U.S. adults who smoke (n=8,231). RESULTS: Perceiving e-cigarettes as less harmful than cigarettes was associated with higher odds of complete switching from cigarettes to e-cigarettes (aORs overall: 1.52; MAs: 1.68). Perceiving e-cigarettes as very/extremely harmful was associated with lower odds of dual use (overall aOR: 0.75; MAs: 0.72) and higher odds of quit intention (aOR among OAs: 1.34). Perceiving cigarettes as very/extremely harmful was associated with lower odds of continued smoking (overall aOR: 0.69; MAs: 0.76; OAs: 0.53), and higher odds of complete switching (overall aOR: 1.65; MAs: 1.86) and quit intention (overall aOR: 1.58; MAs: 1.42; OAs: 1.80). No findings reached significance for YAs. DISCUSSION: E-cigarette relative and absolute harm perceptions were associated with different tobacco behaviors by age. Low cigarette harm perceptions were similarly associated with continued smoking and lower quit intentions in MAs and OAs. Future research should explore what beliefs inform these perceptions and age-related differences. IMPLICATIONS: The associations between harm perceptions and subsequent tobacco behaviors differed by age among adults who smoke. This study adds that low relative harm perceptions of e-cigarettes can promote complete switching among MAs who smoke. High absolute harm perceptions of e-cigarettes may deter dual use among MAs. Additionally, high absolute harm perceptions of cigarettes may reduce smoking and increase cigarette smoking quit intentions among MAs and OAs. Future research is needed to understand the beliefs that support harm perceptions among different age groups and why their effects differ by age, and what factors influence YAs' tobacco use behaviors.

Evaluating Correlations Between Premium Cigar Smoking and Mental Health and Substance Use Dependence Conditions Among U.S. Adults, 2010-2019.

INTRODUCTION: Improved understanding of health conditions associated with premium cigar smoking can inform efforts to reduce cigar use. This paper extends findings commissioned for the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine report on premium cigars. AIMS AND METHODS: We pooled 2010-2019 National Survey on Drug Use and Health data to evaluate cross-sectional associations between premium cigar smoking and mental health and substance use conditions among U.S. adults. A series of logistic regression models adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, cigarette smoking, and alcohol consumption compared odds of each condition associated with past-month premium cigar smoking relative to past-month nonpremium cigar smoking, never tobacco use, and current established cigarette smoking. RESULTS: Premium cigar smoking was associated with lower adjusted odds of past month serious psychological distress, past year major depressive episode, and cannabis and illicit drug dependence relative to nonpremium cigar and cigarette smoking; however, higher odds of alcohol and cannabis dependence were observed relative to never tobacco use, and lower odds of alcohol dependence were observed relative to current cigarette smoking but not current nonpremium cigar smoking. CONCLUSIONS: We observed considerable variation in both magnitude and direction of associations between premium cigar smoking and mental health and substance use indicators depending on the condition and reference group to which premium cigar smoking was compared. IMPLICATIONS: Premium cigar smoking frequently cooccurs with cigarette smoking and alcohol consumption, thus potential health correlates must be considered in appropriate context. We observed considerable variation in direction and magnitude of association depending on the health condition and reference population, as well as potential for reverse causality and residual confounding in this cross-sectional analysis. As the tobacco landscape continues to evolve, rigorous scientific studies that incorporate clear differentiation of cigar type, measures of cumulative use, and temporal data collection are necessary to fully evaluate the health effects of premium cigar smoking and effectively inform Food and Drug Administration regulation.

Estimating Prevalence of Premium or Traditional Cigar Use and User Characteristics Based on Varying Definitions of Use.

BACKGROUND: Premium cigar use is infrequent compared with the use of other tobacco products, including other cigar types (eg, cigarillos), though current measurement methods for premium cigar use have limitations. Accordingly, prevalence estimates from existing surveillance studies likely underestimate the true prevalence of premium cigar use. AIMS AND METHODS: Using an online convenience sample of adults (ages 18-45 years) surveyed in February 2022, we examined premium or traditional cigar prevalence and characterized users based on four definitions of use: (1) past-year use, (2) past 30-day use, (3) use every day or some days, and (4) use every day, some days, or rarely, using a novel, one-item measure. We examined demographics, cigar use behaviors, and other tobacco product use for each definition and conducted sensitivity analyses using cigar brands. RESULTS: Prevalence estimates ranged from 1.8% using Definition 3 to 11.6% using Definition 1. Regardless of definition, premium or traditional cigar users were largely male, white, and aged 25-45 years. A large proportion of users based on Definition 3 were aged 25-34 years, had a regular premium cigar brand, smoked cigars on more than one day in the past month, used cannabis in the past month, and reported perceiving premium cigars as less harmful compared with cigarettes. DISCUSSION: Prevalence estimates of premium or traditional cigar use varied by more than fivefold based on the definition of use and user characteristics varied by definition. Existing national surveys are likely underestimating the prevalence and patterns of premium cigar use. IMPLICATIONS: Given that the negative health effects of premium cigars vary based on how the cigars are used (eg, frequency or duration), as well as co-use with other tobacco products and substances (eg, alcohol and cannabis), accurate measurement of these products is important for understanding patterns of use and their impact on public health.

Cross-sectional Use Patterns and Characteristics of Premium Versus Non-Premium Cigar Smokers in the United States, 2010-2019.

INTRODUCTION: Few studies have addressed the use patterns and characteristics of the past 30 days of premium versus non-premium cigar smokers. AIMS AND METHODS: We pooled 10 years of data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH; 2010-2019) to evaluate use patterns and demographic and tobacco use characteristics of premium and non-premium cigar smokers ages 12 years and older in the U.S. cigar-type was manually coded as premium or non-premium according to the brand used most often. RESULTS: Between 2010 and 2019, 4.7% (95% CI = 4.6-4.8) of individuals aged 12 and older currently smoked cigars (past-30-day use). Smoking premium cigars (0.9% [95% CI = 0.8-0.9]) was less prevalent than smoking non-premium cigars (3.0% [95% CI = 2.9-3.1]). Although current non-premium cigar smoking prevalence steadily declined over the years, current premium cigar smoking prevalence remained stable. Premium cigar smokers were more likely to be older (≥25 years), male, non-Hispanic white, heterosexual, college educated, living in a large metro area, and to have income above 200% of the poverty threshold compared to non-premium users (p < .05). Additionally, past-30-day premium cigar smokers were less likely than non-premium users to initiate cigar smoking before the age of 18 years, smoke cigars frequently or daily, smoke cigarettes, or use marijuana (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, premium cigar smoking is less prevalent than non-premium cigar smoking, especially among populations such as youth, racial/ethnic and sexual minorities, and low socioeconomic individuals. Premium cigar smokers tend to smoke infrequently and initiate cigars later in life compared with non-premium smokers. Study results can inform recommendations for regulating premium cigars. IMPLICATIONS: This study found that between 2010 and 2019, there are meaningful differences in the use patterns and characteristics of past-30-day premium versus non-premium cigar smokers in the United States. Premium cigars comprise a small share of the market compared to other cigar types and are less likely to be used by youth and other tobacco control priority groups (eg, racial/ethnic minorities and individuals with low socioeconomic statuses) that bear a disproportionate burden of risk and harm from using tobacco products. Additionally, most premium cigar users smoke them only occasionally. However, it is important to continue to monitor premium cigar use, as these patterns could shift because of factors like changes in marketing practices, consumer awareness, and product prices. Tobacco policy changes may also alter the patterns and trends of premium cigar use over time. A greater, more comprehensive understanding of premium cigars' physical characteristics, patterns of use, user perceptions, tobacco industry marketing strategies, and health effects will together help to inform cigar-related regulations.

Fever in the ICU: A Predictor of Mortality in Mechanically Ventilated COVID-19 Patients.

PURPOSE: While fever may be a presenting symptom of COVID-19, fever at hospital admission has not been identified as a predictor of mortality. However, hyperthermia during critical illness among ventilated COVID-19 patients in the ICU has not yet been studied. We sought to determine mortality predictors among ventilated COVID-19 ICU patients and we hypothesized that fever in the ICU is predictive of mortality. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 103 ventilated COVID-19 patients admitted to the ICU between March 14 and May 27, 2020. Final follow-up was June 5, 2020. Patients discharged from the ICU or who died were included. Patients still admitted to the ICU at final follow-up were excluded. RESULTS: 103 patients were included, 40 survived and 63(61.1%) died. Deceased patients were older {66 years[IQR18] vs 62.5[IQR10], (p = 0.0237)}, more often male {48(68%) vs 22(55%), (p = 0.0247)}, had lower initial oxygen saturation {86.0%[IQR18] vs 91.5%[IQR11.5], (p = 0.0060)}, and had lower pH nadir than survivors {7.10[IQR0.2] vs 7.30[IQR0.2] (p < 0.0001)}. Patients had higher peak temperatures during ICU stay as compared to hospital presentation {103.3°F[IQR1.7] vs 100.0°F[IQR3.5], (p < 0.0001)}. Deceased patients had higher peak ICU temperatures than survivors {103.6°F[IQR2.0] vs 102.9°F[IQR1.4], (p = 0.0008)}. Increasing peak temperatures were linearly associated with mortality. Febrile patients who underwent targeted temperature management to achieve normothermia did not have different outcomes than those not actively cooled. Multivariable analysis revealed 60% and 75% higher risk of mortality with peak temperature greater than 103°F and 104°F respectively; it also confirmed hyperthermia, age, male sex, and acidosis to be predictors of mortality. CONCLUSIONS: This is one of the first studies to identify ICU hyperthermia as predictive of mortality in ventilated COVID-19 patients. Additional predictors included male sex, age, and acidosis. With COVID-19 cases increasing, identification of ICU mortality predictors is crucial to improve risk stratification, resource management, and patient outcomes.

Risk factors for head and neck cancer in the World Trade Center Health Program General Responder Cohort: results from a nested case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: Head and neck cancers (HNCs) may be among the health consequences of involvement in the World Trade Center (WTC) response on and after 11 September 2001. We conducted a nested case-control study of WTC Health Program (WTCHP) general responders to examine the effects of WTC exposures and behavioural risk factors on HNC. METHODS: We enrolled 64 cases and 136 controls, matched on age, sex and race/ethnicity within risk sets. We assessed tobacco and alcohol use, sexual activity, and occupational exposures prior to, during and after WTC exposure until case diagnosis via questionnaire. We obtained WTC exposure information (duration (first to last day), total days and location of work) from the WTCHP General Responder Data Center. We assessed associations with HNC, and interaction among exposures, using conditional logistic regression. RESULTS: Responders in protective services versus other occupations had increased odds (OR: 2.51, 95% CI 1.09 to 5.82) of HNC. Among those in non-protective services occupations, arriving to the WTC effort on versus after 11 September 2001 was significantly associated with HNC (OR: 3.77, 95% CI 1.00 to 14.11). Duration of work was not significantly associated with HNC. Lifetime and post-WTC years of cigarette smoking and post-WTC number of sex partners were positively and significantly associated with HNC, while alcohol consumption was not. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest opportunities for HNC risk factor mitigation (eg, smoking cessation, human papillomavirus vaccination) and contribute to a risk factor profile which may assist WTCHP clinicians with identifying high-risk responders and improve detection and treatment outcomes in this population.

Differential Trends in Hookah Use Among New Jersey Youth.

INTRODUCTION: Use of 2 or more types of tobacco products is common among youth and young adults, highlighting the need for monitoring and intervention activities to encompass products beyond combustible cigarettes. This study documented patterns and trends of ever, current, and frequent hookah use among high school students in New Jersey by other tobacco product use status. METHODS: We analyzed data from the 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016 waves of the New Jersey Youth Tobacco Survey. Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals described hookah use stratified by use of other tobacco products. Multivariable logistic regression models assessed trends and correlates of hookah use, controlling for the use of other tobacco products and users' sociodemographic characteristics. Negative binomial regression models examined the association between total number of tobacco products used and hookah use while controlling for sociodemographic variables and survey year. RESULTS: The adjusted odds of current and frequent hookah use among New Jersey high school students were significantly higher in 2014, but not in 2016, compared to 2008. In recent years, hookah use among students who had ever smoked hookah, currently smoked hookah, or frequently smoked hookah was more common among students who had ever or currently smoked cigarettes or e-cigarettes. Hookah users consumed a wider variety of other tobacco products than those who did not use hookah. CONCLUSION: Hookah use remains a public health concern for adolescents; it is more common among users of other tobacco products, especially cigarette and e-cigarette smokers. Questions remain as to whether users of multiple tobacco products are being adequately reached by existing policies and regulations.

Reasons to quit and barriers to quitting smoking in US young adults.

BACKGROUND: Young adulthood provides an enormous opportunity to alter trajectories of smoking behaviour for a large public health impact. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to examine correlates of perceived barriers to quitting smoking and reasons to quit in a sample of young adult current and former smokers. METHODS: This study used data from the 2011 National Young Adult Health Survey, a random-digit-dial cellphone survey. Participants were US young adult current smokers aged 18-34 (n = 699) and young adults who were either current smokers who had made a quit attempt in the past-year (n = 402) or former smokers (n = 289). Correlates of barriers to quitting smoking and reasons for quitting smoking were assessed using bivariate and multivariable analyses. RESULTS: More than half of current smokers identified 'loss of a way to handle stress' (59%) and 'cravings or withdrawal' (52%) as barriers to quitting. Female gender, daily smoking and intention to quit remained significantly associated with endorsing 'loss of a way to handle stress' as a barrier to quitting in multivariable analyses. The two most popular reasons for quitting smoking were physical fitness (64%) and the cost of tobacco (64%). CONCLUSION: These findings highlight barriers to cessation and the reasons that young smokers give for quitting. This information may be helpful to physicians as they counsel their young adult patients to quit smoking.

Tobacco industry direct mail receipt and coupon use among young adult smokers.

OBJECTIVE: To examine young adult smokers' receipt of tobacco industry direct mail and use of coupons to purchase cigarettes. METHOD: A total of 699 young adults from a 2011 national survey who reported smoking every day/some days provided self-report data on past-six month receipt of direct mail and past-six month use of coupons to purchase cigarettes. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to calculate adjusted odds of direct mail receipt and coupon use. RESULTS: Overall, 25.1% of young adult smokers reported receiving direct mail from a tobacco company and 24.2% had used a coupon to buy cigarettes in the past 6 months. Direct mail receipt and coupon use to purchase cigarettes were significantly higher among females, daily smokers, and whites. Nearly 70% of smokers who received direct mail had also used a coupon to purchase cigarettes in the preceding 6 months. Brand websites were the most commonly reported means of joining a direct mailing list. CONCLUSION: This study adds to limited research showing receipt of direct mail and use of price reducing coupons by young adults. Also, higher rates of direct mail receipt and coupon use among females suggest that these strategies may be especially effective in encouraging smoking in females.

Electronic Health Record Prompt to Improve Lung Cancer Screening in Primary Care.

INTRODUCTION: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in the U.S. Combusted tobacco use, the primary risk factor, accounts for 90% of all lung cancers. Early detection of lung cancer improves survival, yet lung cancer screening rates are much lower than those of other cancer screening tests. Electronic health record (EHR) systems are an underutilized tool that could improve screening rates. METHODS: This study was conducted in the Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical Group, a university-affiliated network in New Brunswick, NJ. Two novel EHR workflow prompts were implemented on July 1, 2018. These prompts included fields to determine tobacco use and lung cancer screening eligibility and facilitated low-dose computed tomography ordering for eligible patients. The prompts were designed to improve tobacco use data entry, allowing for better lung cancer screening eligibility identification. Data were analyzed in 2022 retrospectively for the period July 1, 2017 to June 30, 2019. The analyses represented 48,704 total patient visits. RESULTS: The adjusted odds of patient record completeness to determine eligibility for low-dose computed tomography (AOR=1.19, 95% CI=1.15, 1.23), eligibility for low-dose computed tomography (AOR=1.59, 95% CI=1.38, 1.82), and whether low-dose computed tomography was ordered (AOR=1.04, 95% CI=1.01, 1.07) all significantly increased after the electronic medical record prompts were implemented. CONCLUSIONS: These findings show the utility and benefit of EHR prompts in primary care settings to increase identification for lung cancer screening eligibility as well as increased low-dose computed tomography ordering.

Prevalence of Comorbidities and Polypharmacy in a Historically Minoritized Community and Their Impact on Virologic Suppression in Persons with HIV.

Improved life expectancy from advances in antiretroviral therapy (ART) has been followed by a rise in comorbidities and polypharmacy in this aging population. Historically, polypharmacy has been associated with suboptimal virologic outcomes in persons with HIV, although data in the current ART era and among historically marginalized populations in the United States are limited. We measured the prevalence of comorbidities and polypharmacy, evaluating their impact on virologic suppression. This retrospective IRB-approved cross-sectional study reviewed health records of adults with HIV on ART and receiving care (≥2 visits) in 2019 at a single center in a historically minoritized community. Virologic suppression (HIV RNA <200 copies/mL) based on polypharmacy (≥5 non-HIV medications) or multimorbidity (≥2 chronic conditions) was evaluated. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors associated with virologic suppression, with age, race/ethnicity, and CD4 < 200 cells/mm3 as covariates. Of the 963 individuals that met the criteria, 67%, 47%, and 34% had ≥1 comorbidity, multimorbidity, and polypharmacy, respectively. The cohort demographics were: mean of 49 years (range, 18-81), 40% cisgender women, 46% Latinx individuals, 45% Black individuals, 8% White individuals. Virologic suppression rates were 95% among patients with polypharmacy compared with 86% in those with a lower pill burden (p = 0.0001). The odds of virologic success were higher for individuals with polypharmacy [adjusted odds ratio, aOR = 2.3 (95% confidence interval, CI: 1.2-4.4)] and Latinx identity [aOR = 2.4 (95% CI: 1.5-3.8)], but lower if a CD4 count <200 cells/mm3 [aOR = 0.07 (95% CI: 0.04-0.1)]. The comorbidity burden was higher than previously described, which are driving polypharmacy rates. In the current ART era, polypharmacy is not inherently associated with worse virologic outcomes.

Validating Wave 1 (2014) Urinary Cotinine and TNE-2 Cut-points for Differentiating Wave 4 (2017) Cigarette Use from Non-use in the United States Using Data from the PATH Study.

BACKGROUND: Sex and racial/ethnic identity-specific cut-points for validating tobacco use using Wave 1 (W1) of the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study were published in 2020. The current study establishes predictive validity of the W1 (2014) urinary cotinine and total nicotine equivalents-2 (TNE-2) cut-points on estimating Wave 4 (W4; 2017) tobacco use. METHODS: For exclusive and polytobacco cigarette use, weighted prevalence estimates based on W4 self-report alone and with exceeding the W1 cut-point were calculated to identify the percentage missed without biochemical verification. Sensitivity and specificity of W1 cut-points on W4 self-reported tobacco use status were examined. ROC curves were used to determine the optimal W4 cut-points to distinguish past 30-day users from non-users, and evaluate whether the cut-points significantly differed from W1. RESULTS: Agreement between W4 self-reported use and exceeding the W1 cut-points was high overall and when stratified by demographic subgroups (0.7%-4.4% of use was missed if relying on self-report alone). The predictive validity of using the W1 cut-points to classify exclusive cigarette and polytobacco cigarette use at W4 was high (>90% sensitivity and specificity, except among polytobacco Hispanic smokers). Cut-points derived using W4 data did not significantly differ from the W1-derived cut-points [e.g., W1 exclusive = 40.5 ng/mL cotinine (95% confidence interval, CI: 26.1-62.8), W4 exclusive = 29.9 ng/mL cotinine (95% CI: 13.5-66.4)], among most demographic subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: The W1 cut-points remain valid for biochemical verification of self-reported tobacco use in W4. IMPACT: Findings from can be used in clinical and epidemiologic studies to reduce misclassification of cigarette smoking status.

Perceptions about levels of harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes, and associations with relative e-cigarette harm perceptions, e-cigarette use and interest.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Exposure to chemicals contributes to harm from nicotine products, and e-cigarette communications often refer to chemicals. However, while e-cigarette studies commonly measure perceived harmfulness of e-cigarettes relative to cigarettes, few have assessed comparative perceptions about chemicals. This study measured perceived levels of harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes compared with cigarettes and associations with e-cigarette/cigarette relative harm perceptions, e-cigarette use and interest. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This was an on-line cross-sectional survey of adults/young adults from a nationally representative research panel in the United States conducted in January 2021. Participants were independent samples of 1018 adults who smoked cigarettes and 1051 young adult non-smokers (aged 18-29 years). MEASUREMENTS: Participants were asked their perceptions of the level of harmful chemicals in e-cigarettes versus cigarettes (fewer/about the same/more/do not know), perceived harmfulness of using e-cigarette versus cigarettes (less/about the same/more/do not know) and their current e-cigarette use and use interest. FINDINGS: Approximately 20% of all participants (18.1% of adult smokers, and 21.0% of young adult non-smokers) believed e-cigarettes contain fewer harmful chemicals than cigarettes, while 35.6% of adult smokers and 24.9% of young adult non-smokers responded 'do not know'. Participants more frequently reported 'do not know' to the chemicals item than the harm item. Approximately half (51.0-55.7%) of those who believed e-cigarettes contain fewer harmful chemicals also believed e-cigarettes are less harmful than cigarettes. Both beliefs were associated with higher odds of interest in using e-cigarettes [less harmful belief, odds ratio (OR) = 5.53, 95% confidence interval (CI = 2.93-10.43); fewer chemicals belief, OR = 2.45, 95% CI = 1.40-4.29] and past 30-day e-cigarette use (less harmful belief, OR = 2.53, 95% CI = 1.17-5.44; fewer chemicals belief, OR = 5.09, 95% CI = 2.31-11.19) for adults who smoke, but not young adult non-smokers. CONCLUSIONS: In the United States, most adults who smoke cigarettes and young adult non-smokers do not appear to think that e-cigarettes have fewer harmful chemicals than cigarettes, and many are uncertain about how these levels compare.

Lung Cancer Screening Knowledge and Perceived Barriers Among Physicians in the United States.

Introduction: Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death in the United States and has historically been detected late in its course. Low-dose computed tomography scan (LDCT) reduces lung cancer mortality by 20% and is currently recommended by clinical practice guidelines. However, compared with other cancer screening modalities, LDCT utilization remains low. This study surveyed office-based primary care physicians across the United States to better understand LDCT utilization. Methods: A total of 1500 family and internal medicine physicians selected from the American Medical Association's physician master file were surveyed between April and July 2019 regarding LDCT practices, eligibility, clinical scenarios, and perceived barriers. Results: The American Association for Public Opinion Research response rate 3 was 59% (652 respondents); 599 completed supplemental questions regarding lung cancer screening. A total of 88% of respondents discussed LDCT in the previous year, and 78% had ordered at least one LDCT. Most (59%) knew the tobacco exposure criteria for LDCT and correctly identified appropriate clinical scenarios (49%-86% responded correctly). Less than half of respondents correctly identified the age eligibility criteria (44%-45% responded correctly). In general, male physicians, those who graduated after 1990, and family medicine physicians were more likely to report accurate knowledge regarding LDCT eligibility. The top perceived barriers to LDCT were cost to the patient (48% identified as a major barrier), insurance not covering screening (46% major), and patients being unaware of lung cancer screening (40% major). Conclusion: Knowledge and practices about lung cancer screening are improving, though remain suboptimal. The most common barriers remain cost or insurance-based and suggest the need for a systems-based response to increase awareness and reduce the underutilization of LDCT.

Examining the Survey Setting Effect on Current E-Cigarette Use Estimates among High School Students in the 2021 National Youth Tobacco Survey.

The 2021 National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) was completed by youth online during class time, either in school or at home due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Given the role of NYTS data in tobacco regulatory science, it is vital to understand the effect of survey settings (home, school) on tobacco-use estimates. We used a series of multivariable logistic regressions to examine whether survey settings (home vs. school) predicted current e-cigarette use among high school students, controlling for other known predictors of e-cigarette use as well as the pandemic learning model that was dominant in students' counties (e.g., nearly all at-home, majority in school). We observed a significant survey setting effect. Those who completed the survey in school had higher odds of current e-cigarette use than those who completed the same survey at home (AOR = 1.74); this effect was attenuated when we controlled for the pandemic learning model (AOR = 1.38). Moreover, e-cigarette use was independently associated with students' learning model; students whose schools were nearly entirely in-person had the highest odds of e-cigarette use compared to students whose learning model was nearly all at-home (AOR = 1.65). Survey setting is a methodological artifact in the 2021 NYTS. Perceived privacy and peer effects can potentially explain this artifact.

A Pilot Feasibility Study of an Online Youth Tobacco Survey Administration among High School Students.

The COVID-19 pandemic restrictions forced many schools to shift to remote or hybrid learning, disrupting surveillance systems such as the New Jersey Youth Tobacco Survey, traditionally administered in schools by paper and pencil. In spring 2021, we conducted a feasibility study among a convenience sample of six public high schools to assess the use of an online survey to allow for remote participation. In each school, 4 to 6 classes were selected randomly, and all students within a sampled class were selected to participate in the survey. A total of 702 students completed surveys. School contacts were asked to provide qualitative feedback about the survey administration. Feedback was generally positive, with a few suggestions for improvement. Approximately 19% of students reported the ever use of e-cigarettes. Among current e-cigarette users, there was a shift in popularity from prefilled or refillable pods or cartridges (23.3%) to disposable e-cigarettes (53.5%). Less than 10% of current e-cigarette users reported using tobacco-flavored e-cigarettes, despite a statewide flavor ban on all other flavors.

The Impact of Varying Incentives on Physician Survey Response Rates: An experiment in the context of COVID-19.

Since 2018, our research team has fielded national, probability surveys of internal medicine physicians. We expected our usually high response rates to fall in the 2021 iteration of the survey due to challenges related to the COVID-19 pandemic and our inability to offer all participants a $50 upfront incentive as we had previously. To understand the independent impacts of the lower incentive and surveying physicians in the context of the pandemic, we fielded an experiment varying the incentive amount physicians were offered. Our results suggest that while higher incentives still lead to higher response rates during COVID-19, the higher incentive did not achieve comparable pre-COVID response rates. We conclude with additional data on the impact of the incentives on survey cost, number of reminders needed, and the mode in which respondents chose to complete the survey.

Perceived effectiveness of cancer screening among family medicine and internal medicine physicians in the United States.

Family and internal medicine physicians play an important role in cancer screening, yet there are limited data on their beliefs regarding effectiveness of screening tests, which may affect physicians' likelihood to recommend such tests. The study purpose was to assess current beliefs among family medicine and internal medicine physicians regarding effectiveness of various types of cancer screening. A national sample of 582 physicians from the American Medical Association's Physician Masterfile were surveyed. Participants were asked about their perceived effectiveness of screening for colon, lung, breast, prostate, and cervical cancer among average, healthy individuals. Chi-square tests were conducted to assess relationships between perceiving screening tests to be 'very effective in reducing cancer-related mortality' and demographic characteristics. A substantial majority of physicians perceived colonoscopy (83.8%) and Pap smear (82.9%) to be very effective. Perceiving low-dose computed tomography (LDCT), Pap smear, and prostate-specific antigen (PSA) as 'very effective' differed by gender, with females less likely to endorse LDCT and Pap smear but more likely to endorse PSA. Perceiving PSA as 'very effective' differed by age and graduation year, with younger or more recently graduated physicians being less likely to perceive PSA as 'very effective'. Non-Hispanic Black/African-American physicians were more likely to perceive mammography as 'very effective' than other groups. Physicians' perceived effectiveness about cancer screening tests varies widely and may influence their recommendations or usage of these tests. Understanding physicians' beliefs can help in improving uptake of evidence-based screening tests by providers and patients to promote early detection and successful treatment.