Research News Roundup: August 13, 2026

Journal: Health Communication, 2026, doi: 10.1080/10410236.2026 .2709693

Authors: Susana Peinado, Megan Vigorita, Matthew Eggers, Laura Baum, James Nonnemaker, Seth M. Noar, … James Spinks

Abstract:

Despite the routine use of a variety of message evaluation (ME) measures (e.g., perceived message effectiveness) in formative research for tobacco education campaigns, studies assessing the validity of these measures for predicting actual message effectiveness (AME) (e.g., intention to use e-cigarettes) are needed. A within-subjects experiment with adolescents (N = 2,120) was conducted with youth-focused e-cigarette prevention ads to examine and compare the validity of 10 ME measures often used in message pretesting studies. Aggregate message-level ME scores were created and their relationship with outcomes commonly targeted by tobacco prevention campaigns was assessed, while controlling for individual characteristics and baseline measures of the outcomes. More ME measures predicted intention to use e-cigarettes than other e-cigarette-related outcomes. Perceived message effectiveness (PME), assessed as message perceptions and as effects perceptions, psychological reactance, and perceived argument strength were the strongest predictors of intention to use e-cigarettes. Other ME measures, such as information seeking and positive emotional reactions, predicted outcomes that PME measures did not. However, due to the use of aggregate message-level ME scores, none of the ME measures were particularly strong predictors of AME. The lack of variation in the association between ME measures and intention to use e-cigarettes by e-cigarette use status suggests these ME measures are broadly applicable. These findings support the validity of ME measures and suggest that to better anticipate potential message effects on multiple tobacco education campaign outcomes, it may be worthwhile to include other ME measures in addition to message or effects perceptions in message pretesting.

To read the full text, please visit the publisher’s website.

Journal: Pain Management Nursing, 2026, doi: 10.1016/j.pmn.2026.07.019

Authors: Henry Ofori Duah, Diane Von Ah, & Ethan Morgan

Abstract:

Purpose: To explore the impact of health insurance on the rural-urban disparities in opioid misuse in the United States.

Methods: A secondary analysis of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) was conducted using datasets from 2021 to ​2023. Outcomes examined were past-month and past-year opioid misuse. Residence was categorized using the Core Based Statistical Area (CBSA) classifications: large CBSA (>1 million persons); small CBSA (<1 million persons); rural: residing in a non-CBSA. Statistical analysis included univariate analysis, multivariable logistic regression, and a model for each outcome that accounted for moderation between residence and insurance.

Results: The weighted sample comprised 281,769,638 individuals, of whom 3.2% and 1.0% reported past-year and past-month opioid misuse, respectively. The multivariable analysis without moderation showed that, compared with non-Hispanic Whites, non-Hispanic Asians had lower odds of past-year opioid misuse (p < .001). Significant moderation was observed only for past-month opioid misuse. The main effect of residence showed that past-month misuse was lower among individuals living in non-CBSAs than among those in large CBSAs (aOR = 0.58; 95% CI, 0.39,0.85). After adjusting for moderation, individuals in non-CBSAs without health insurance had higher odds of past-month misuse than those in large CBSAs without insurance (aOR = 3.41, 95% CI, 1.37, 8.51). Higher income was protective against opioid misuse, but being male was associated with increased odds of misuse.

Conclusions: People from rural areas without health insurance had higher odds of past-month opioid misuse than those without health insurance in large CBSAs. These findings can guide focused interventions to address opioid misuse.

To read the full text, please visit the publisher’s website.

Journal: Preventing Chronic Disease, 2026, doi: 10.5888/pcd23.250427

Authors: Katherine A. Moran, Philip E. Rosenbaum, Christina Meyers, Monica Cornelius, Margaret Mahoney, Michael Sawdey, Samantha N. Cwalina, & Livia Navon

Abstract:

Introduction: Most tobacco use begins during adolescence. We used National Youth Tobacco Survey (NYTS) data from 2023 and 2024 to examine menthol tobacco product use among US middle and high school students.

Methods: We used pooled data from the 2023 and 2024 NYTS (n = 51,930) to calculate nationally representative prevalence estimates for past 30-day menthol and nonmenthol tobacco product use, stratified by sociodemographic and mental health indicators. We used χ2 tests with Benjamini-Hochberg adjustments to compare behaviors.

Results: During 2023 and 2024, 22.1% of students who currently used tobacco (representing 520,000 students) used menthol products. Overall, menthol products were used by 40.0% of students who smoked cigarettes, 18.0% who used e-cigarettes, and 11.5% who smoked cigars. Menthol tobacco use was significantly higher among males (vs females) (26.1% vs 18.3%), high schoolers (vs middle schoolers) (23.9% vs 17.0%), and those with moderate to severe anxiety or depression (vs no or mild symptoms) (25.0% vs 18.8%). By race and ethnicity, use ranged from 12.0% (non-Hispanic Black) to 28.6% (non-Hispanic multiracial). Compared with students who used nonmenthol products, a higher proportion of those who used menthol cigarettes or e-cigarettes reported younger age at first use of tobacco (<11 y) (42.5% vs 26.8% and 19.9% vs 13.2%, respectively), use on 20 to 30 of the past 30 days (38.2% vs 20.2% and 53.4% vs 33.2%, respectively), and fewer past-year smoking quit attempts (49.7% vs 63.2%, respectively).

Conclusion: More than 500,000 US middle and high school students used menthol products; prevalence varied by sociodemographic and mental health indicators. Menthol tobacco use correlates with earlier initiation, higher frequency of use, and reduced past-year quit attempts. Additional efforts to reduce access to menthol products among young people may reduce tobacco use in this population.

To read the full text, please visit the publisher’s website.

Journal: Journal of Adolescence, 2026, doi: 10.1002/jad.70192

Authors: Mahsa P. Yousefkhani, Xiafei Wang, & Sara A. Vasilenko

Abstract:

Introduction: While adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) are robust risk factors for adolescent substance use, the prospective neurocognitive pathways linking both cumulative and specific adversities to substance use remain understudied. This study tested a vulnerability model by examining whether executive function (EF) deficits mediate the link between cumulative and specific ACEs and substance use, and whether this pathway differs for deprivation- versus threat-based adversities.

Methods: This longitudinal study used parent- and youth-report data from the US Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study (N = 4731; Mage at baseline = 9.9 years; 52.3% male; 56.5% White, 13.8% Hispanic, 13.1% Black). We tested mediation models with temporally ordered assessments of ACEs (ages 9-11), parent-reported EF deficits (12-13), and subsequent substance use (13-14).

Results: The indirect effect of cumulative ACEs on substance use through EF deficits was significant, accounting for 10% of the total effect. Deprivation-based ACEs (material hardship and emotional neglect) were fully mediated by EF. Several threat-based adversities (e.g., household violence, bullying) also showed full mediation. In contrast, sexual abuse demonstrated a significant direct effect but no significant indirect effect through EF.

Conclusions: EF deficits represent a significant pathway from cumulative ACEs to adolescent substance use, supporting a vulnerability model. This pathway appears robust for deprivation-based and many chaotic threat-based adversities, but sexual abuse is an exception that likely operates through non-EF, trauma-specific mechanisms. Prevention efforts should be multifaceted, incorporating EF-focused interventions for at-risk youth while prioritizing trauma-focused care for survivors of sexual abuse.

To read the full text, please visit the publisher’s website.