Health warning labels on heated tobacco products and their impact on use intentions and risk perceptions: a cross-sectional study of adult tobacco users in the US and Israel

Table 2 Multivariable logistic regression analyses examining correlates of noticing HTP HWLs among current tobacco users who were aware of HTPs (N = 424) and of HWL effects among those who noticed HWLs (N = 372)

	Noticed HTP HWLs		HWL effect (among those who noticed HWLs)
	Noticed HTP HWLs		Concerned [Ref: no effect]		Reassured [Ref: no effect]		Reassured [Ref: concerned]
	aOR	95% CI	aOR	95% CI	aOR	95% CI	aOR	95% CI
Current tobacco use status
Cigarettes (Ref: no)	0.81	0.38, 1.73	0.92	0.51, 1.67	1.07	0.53, 2.17	1.16	0.54, 2.49
E-cigarettes (Ref: no)	0.65	0.35, 1.23	1.04	0.63, 1.72	1.66	0.94, 2.94	1.60	0.85, 3.01
Heated tobacco products (Ref: no)	1.60	0.76, 3.37	1.00	0.54, 1.86	2.11	1.11, 4.00	2.11	1.04, 4.27
Other tobacco products* (Ref: no)	0.64	0.34, 1.23	2.10	1.21, 3.64	1.26	0.69, 2.30	0.60	0.31, 1.18
Demographics
Israel (Ref: US)	1.00	0.50, 2.00	0.83	0.68, 2.13	3.85	1.85, 7.69	3.23	1.45, 7.14
Age (Ref: 36–45)
18–25	0.88	0.38, 2.02	1.06	0.54, 2.10	0.86	0.41, 1.80	0.81	0.35, 1.84
26–35	0.84	0.42, 1.71	1.15	0.65, 2.05	1.05	0.56, 1.98	0.91	0.45, 1.85
Female (Ref: male)	0.60	0.33, 1.12	1.77	1.03, 3.05	1.91	1.07, 3.42	1.08	0.57, 2.04
Sexual minorities (Ref: heterosexual)	1.06	0.46, 2.45	1.08	0.54, 2.16	0.57	0.24, 1.34	0.52	0.21, 1.29
< College degree (Ref: ≥ College degree)	1.35	0.72, 2.52	0.85	0.50, 1.44	2.57	1.42, 4.63	3.03	1.58, 5.83

Binary logistic regression for noticing HWLs. Multinomial logistic regression for effects (ref: no effect). *Other tobacco includes hookah, cigar, pipe, and smokeless tobacco. Bold indicates p < .05. In US-specific models, being Asian (vs. White) was associated with concerned (vs. no effect) and reassured (vs. no effect), but was not included in the table. No other country-specific differences in results in the US- or Israel-specific models

ISSN: 2045-4015