Katherine Henderson

Ms. Katherine Henderson

orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

8Years (2019-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
27 November 2021 in Addictive Behaviors Reports
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ANAmy L Nyman
Amy L Nyman
CSClaire Spears
Claire Spears
VCVictoria Churchill
Victoria Churchill
VDVuong V. Do
Vuong V. Do
KHKatherine Henderson
Katherine Henderson
Jidong HuangJidong Huang
Jidong Huang
The COVID-19 pandemic may impact cigarette smokers’ behaviors. Among smokers, perceptions about the risks of contracting COVID-19 and the severity of COVID-19 illness likely vary, and perceptions may be associated with individual smoking behavior. Our study measured smokers’ perceptions of COVID-19 risks and their association with smoking and quitting outcomes. A sample of 1,223 U.S. adult cigarette smokers participated in an online survey in October-November 2020 to assess their COVID-19-related risk perceptions and changes in smoking, readiness to quit, and quit attempts during the COVID-19 pandemic. More smokers believed smoking could increase the severity of COVID-19 (43.6%, 95% CI: 40.1, 47.3) than believed smoking makes them more susceptible to COVID-19 (20.0%, 95% CI: 17.2, 23.0.). While there were no associations between perceptions of COVID-19 susceptibility and smoking behaviors or intentions, perceptions of greater smoking-related COVID-19 severity were associated with both higher likelihood of smoking increases (aOR: 2.16, 95% CI: 1.19, 3.93) and greater readiness to quit smoking (aOR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.18, 2.30). Greater perceptions of general COVID-19 severity were associated with higher likelihood of smoking reductions (aOR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.02, 1.22), greater readiness to quit smoking (aOR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.22), and higher likelihood of making a quit attempt (aOR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.04, 1.22). Smokers’ perceptions about COVID-19 severity are related to their smoking behavior and likelihood of making a quit attempt. Providing smokers with accurate information on the relationship between smoking and the severity of COVID-19 may alter smoking behaviors.


AEAbigail Evans
Abigail Evans
KHKatherine Henderson
Katherine Henderson
AGAnna Geier
Anna Geier
Scott WeaverScott Weaver
Scott Weaver
CSClaire Spears
Claire Spears
TPTerry Pechacek
Terry Pechacek
Switching completely from cigarettes to electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) may reduce health risks for addicted smokers. This paper provides information about perceptions and other factors that may influence smokers’ ENDS use and substitution for cigarettes. We conducted 12 online focus groups (N = 61) among smokers who had never tried using ENDS (Never Users, N = 11), currently used both cigarettes and ENDS (Dual Users, N = 21), used but discontinued ENDS (Rejectors, N = 14), and switched completely to ENDS use (Switchers, N = 15). Thematic analysis was used to interpret the transcripts. Participants described initial interest in trying ENDS in hopes of quitting smoking and because of convenience (i.e., due to rules, regulations, or social norms). Risk perceptions and higher prices relative to cigarettes were reported as disadvantages of ENDS that discouraged initiation. Dual Users and Rejectors reported product problems (e.g., products breaking) and dissatisfaction (i.e., inability to satisfy cravings for cigarettes) as factors that lowered their substitutability for cigarettes or led to discontinuing ENDS use. Switchers indicated that satisfaction, lack of product problems, and perceived safety facilitated successfully switching from cigarette smoking to exclusive ENDS use. However, Switchers reported trying many products before they found ones that satisfied their needs. We recommend that policymakers consider the potential impact of tobacco control policies on smokers’ motivation and ability to switch completely from cigarettes to ENDS.

2 June 2020 in Journal of Medical Internet Research
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ZMZachary Massey
Zachary Massey
Yachao LiYachao Li
Yachao Li
JHJessica Holli
Jessica Holli
VCVictoria Churchill
Victoria Churchill
BYBo Yang
Bo Yang
Lucy PopovaLucy Popova
Lucy Popova
Background: As user modification can alter the addictiveness and toxicity of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), more research is needed to understand the types, motivations, risks, and information sources that lead to these product alterations. YouTube has been identified as a major platform where ENDS users obtain and share information about ENDS products and modifications. However, a comprehensive study of ENDS modification videos on YouTube is lacking. Objective: This study aimed to analyze the content of YouTube videos depicting modifications of ENDS. Methods: YouTube was searched in March 2019 to identify videos depicting ENDS modifications. Search terms were derived from interviews with ENDS users and current literature. We used 28 search phrases that combined the words vape and vaping with modification-related key terms (eg, custom build, modification, and dripping). The final sample included 168 videos. Results: Videos were 1 to 108 min long (median 9.55). Presenters were largely male (117/168, 69.6%), white (94/168, 56.0%), and older than 25 years (94/168, 56.0%). Most videos gave how to instructions (148/168, 88.1%), but few offered warnings (30/168, 17.9%) or mentioned commercial alternatives to modifications they presented (16/168, 9.5%). The ENDS devices most often featured were drippers (63/168, 37.5%) and refillable tanks (37/168, 22.0%). The most often modified ENDS components were coils (82/168, 48.8%) and e-liquids (34/168, 20.2%), which included adding other substances, such as cannabis, to the e-liquids (6/168, 3.6%). Most videos portrayed ENDS modifications positively (106/168, 63.1% positive; 60/168, 35.7% neutral; and 2/168, 1.2% negative) and were either neutral or positive in their overall portrayal of ENDS devices (78/168, 46.4% positive; 89/168, 53.0% neutral; and 1/168, 0.6% negative). Conclusions: This study identified several concerning trends in popular YouTube videos on ENDS modifications, including lack of warnings, the addition of marijuana derivatives to e-liquids, and the positive portrayal of ENDS devices and modifications. By identifying the types of modifications (coil and e-liquid being the most prevalent), this study sets an agenda for research on the effects of modifications.

16 April 2021 in Tobacco Control
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
HDHue Trong Duong
Hue Trong Duong
ELEmily Loud
Emily Loud
JTJames F Thrasher
James F Thrasher
KHKatherine Henderson
Katherine Henderson
David AshleyDavid Ashley
David Ashley
Lucy PopovaLucy Popova
Lucy Popova
Objective In 2017, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced a proposed regulation to lower nicotine in cigarettes to minimally addictive levels to help smokers quit. We sought to explore effective message strategies communicating about nicotine reduction in cigarettes across the different key audiences that the regulation is most likely to influence. Methods We designed four types of messages: efficacy messages, risk messages, a message about alternative sources of nicotine and a compensation message. Sixteen virtual focus groups were conducted in Atlanta and San Francisco in April–May 2020. Data were analysed in NVivo 12.0 using a thematic analysis approach. Findings Exclusive smokers were receptive to both efficacy messages and risk messages. Dual users were the only group that was open to resorting to alternative sources of nicotine. Former smokers were critical of these messages as promoting the new kinds of cigarettes and potentially encouraging initiation and relapse of smoking. Non-smokers felt that efficacy messages downplayed the risks of smoking and did not scare people away from smoking. Presenting information that very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) still contain harmful chemicals made smokers question continued smoking in the absence of nicotine and view VLNCs as harmful. Conclusions Messages communicating about nicotine reduction in cigarettes might help to motivate smokers to quit and can correct the misperceptions that VLNCs are less harmful. The FDA should consider specific target audiences and use different messages that complement each other in communicating about this regulation.

28 September 2022 in Tobacco Control
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
RRReed M Reynolds
Reed M Reynolds
Lucy PopovaLucy Popova
Lucy Popova
David AshleyDavid Ashley
David Ashley
KHKatherine Henderson
Katherine Henderson
CNCharity A Ntansah
Charity A Ntansah
JTJames Thrasher
James Thrasher
Background To reduce smoking and the harms it causes, countries, including the USA, are considering policies to reduce nicotine in combustible tobacco to minimally addictive levels. Effective messages about very low nicotine cigarettes (VLNCs) and this policy are crucial in combating misperceptions threatening the policy’s effectiveness. Data and methods A discrete choice experiment assessed messages about VLNCs. Participants were 590 adults who smoked exclusively, 379 adults who both smoked and used e-cigarettes, 443 adults who formerly smoked and 351 young adults who never smoked (total n=1763). Seven message attributes were varied systematically (source, harm, chemicals, nicotine, satisfaction, addictiveness and quitting efficacy). Outcomes were selection of messages that generated the most positive attitude towards reduced nicotine policy, the greatest perceived harmfulness of VLNCs, and most strongly motivated quitting and initiating behaviour for VLNCs. Results Information about specific harms and chemicals of VLNCs had the largest effects on selection of messages as eliciting more negative attitudes towards VLNCs policy, increasing perceived VLNC harmfulness, increasing motivation to quit VLNCs and decreasing motivation to try VLNCs. Messages with information about quitting efficacy were selected as more motivating to quit among those who smoke, but also more motivating to try VLNCs among those who do not smoke. Conclusion Harm and chemical information can be prioritised to ensure VLNCs are not misperceived as less harmful than regular cigarettes. Messages about increased quitting efficacy and reduced addictiveness associated with VLNCs may backfire if presented to those who do not smoke.