ArticleJMIR formative research2025
International Expert Consensus on Relevant Health and Functioning Concepts to Assess in Users of Tobacco and Nicotine Products: Delphi Study.
Article in JMIR formative research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA Delphi study was conducted to reach a consensus among international clinical and health care experts on the most important health and functioning self-reported concepts when evaluating a switch from smoking cigarettes to using smoke-free tobacco and/or nicotine products (sf-TNPs).
objectiveThe aim of this research was to identify concepts considered important to measure when assessing the health and functioning status of users of tobacco and/or nicotine products.
methodsExperts (n=105), including health care professionals, researchers, and policy makers, from 26 countries with professional experience and knowledge of sf-TNPs completed a 3-round, adapted Delphi panel. Online surveys combining quantitative (MaxDiff best-worst scaling and latent class analysis) and qualitative assessments were used to rank and achieve alignment on the importance of 69 health and functioning concepts. All experts participating in round I completed round II, and 101 (95%) completed round III.
resultsThe round I analysis identified 36 (52%) out of 69 concepts that were refined for the round II assessment. The highest-ranked concepts reflected health-related impacts, while the lowest-ranked ranked concepts were related to aesthetics and social impacts. Round II ranking reinforced the importance of concepts relating to health impacts, and the analysis resulted in 20 concepts retained for round III assessment. In round III, the 4 highest-ranked concepts were cardiovascular symptoms, shortness of breath, chest pain, and worry about smoking-related diseases and impact on general health, and they made up 50% of the total score in the MaxDiff analysis. Experts reported likelihood of seeing measurable levels of change in the final 20 concepts with a switch to an sf-TNP. The majority of experts felt it was "likely" or "extremely likely" to observe changes in concepts such as gum problems (74/101, 73%), phlegm or mucus while coughing or not coughing (72/101, 71%), general perception of well-being (72/101, 71%), and throat irritation or sore throat (72/101, 71%). Latent class analysis revealed subgroups of experts with different perceptions of the relative importance of the concepts, which varied depending on professional specialty and geographic region. For example, 74% (14/19) of oncologists aligned with the subgroup prioritizing physical health symptoms, while 71% (12/17) of experts from Asia aligned with the subgroup considering both physical health and psychosocial aspects.
conclusionsThis study identified key concepts to be considered in the development of a new measurement instrument to assess the self-reported health and functioning status of individuals using sf-TNPs. The findings contribute to the scientific evidence base for understanding and evaluating both the individual and public health impacts of sf-TNPs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.