These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

130 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 28001492)

  • 1. Effects of Temporal Framing on Response to Antismoking Messages: The Mediating Role of Perceived Relevance.
    Zhao X; Peterson E
    J Health Commun; 2017 Jan; 22(1):37-44. PubMed ID: 28001492
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Time Matters: Framing Antismoking Messages Using Current Smokers' Preexisting Perceptions of Temporal Distance to Smoking-Related Health Risks.
    Kim K; Kim HS
    Health Commun; 2018 Mar; 33(3):338-348. PubMed ID: 28095028
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Conditional Effects of Gain-Loss-Framed Narratives among Current Smokers at Different Stages of Change.
    Kim HK; Lee TK
    J Health Commun; 2017 Dec; 22(12):990-998. PubMed ID: 29199898
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Short and Sweet: The Persuasive Effects of Message Framing and Temporal Context in Antismoking Warning Labels.
    Mollen S; Engelen S; Kessels LT; van den Putte B
    J Health Commun; 2017 Jan; 22(1):20-28. PubMed ID: 27997285
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. The Effect of Temporal Frames in Anti-Smoking Messages on the Extension of Anti-Smoking Arguments to Smokers.
    Lee SJ
    J Health Commun; 2020 May; 25(5):421-429. PubMed ID: 32584651
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. The influence of message framing, intention to quit smoking, and nicotine dependence on the persuasiveness of smoking cessation messages.
    Moorman M; van den Putte B
    Addict Behav; 2008 Oct; 33(10):1267-75. PubMed ID: 18584971
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Temporal framing and consideration of future consequences: effects on smokers' and at-risk nonsmokers' responses to cigarette health warnings.
    Zhao X; Nan X; Iles IA; Yang B
    Health Commun; 2015; 30(2):175-85. PubMed ID: 25470442
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Enhancing Smoking Risk Communications: The Influence of Health Literacy and Message Content.
    Hoover DS; Wetter DW; Vidrine DJ; Nguyen N; Frank SG; Li Y; Waters AJ; Meade CD; Vidrine JI
    Ann Behav Med; 2018 Feb; 52(3):204-215. PubMed ID: 29538662
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Effects of Gain- and Loss-Framed Quit Messages on Smokers: Test of the Ability to Process the Health Message as a Moderator.
    Arendt F; Bräunlein J; Koleva V; Mergen M; Schmid S; Tratner L
    J Health Commun; 2018; 23(8):800-806. PubMed ID: 30300104
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Effects of message framing and visual-fear appeals on smoker responses to antismoking ads.
    Kang J; Lin CA
    J Health Commun; 2015; 20(6):647-55. PubMed ID: 25868549
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Effects of antismoking media on college students' smoking-related beliefs and intentions.
    Martino SC; Setodji CM; Dunbar MS; Gong M; Shadel WG
    Psychol Addict Behav; 2018 Feb; 32(1):76-83. PubMed ID: 29189021
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. The impact of smoking cues in antismoking messages among intermittent and light smokers.
    Xu J
    Psychol Health; 2017 Jan; 32(1):1-18. PubMed ID: 27616462
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Qualitative study of Singaporean youths' perception of antismoking campaigns: what works and what does not.
    Shahwan S; Fauziana R; Satghare P; Vaingankar J; Picco L; Chong SA; Subramaniam M
    Tob Control; 2016 Dec; 25(e2):e101-e106. PubMed ID: 26944686
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The effects of framed messages for engaging adolescents with online smoking prevention interventions.
    Mays D; Hawkins KB; Bredfeldt C; Wolf H; Tercyak KP
    Transl Behav Med; 2017 Jun; 7(2):196-203. PubMed ID: 28290144
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. A smoker's choice? Identifying the most autonomy-supportive message frame in an online computer-tailored smoking cessation intervention.
    Altendorf MB; Smit ES; Azrout R; Hoving C; Weert JCMV
    Psychol Health; 2021 May; 36(5):549-574. PubMed ID: 32885683
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Investigating the Interplay of Self-Construal and Independent Vs. Interdependent Self-Affirmation.
    Ma Z; Nan X
    J Health Commun; 2019; 24(3):293-302. PubMed ID: 30963811
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. The unintended target: assessing nonsmokers' reactions to gain- and loss-framed antismoking public service announcements.
    Wong NC; Harvell LA; Harrison KJ
    J Health Commun; 2013; 18(12):1402-21. PubMed ID: 24015773
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Smoking Is So Ew!: College Smokers' Reactions to Health- Versus Social-Focused Antismoking Threat Messages.
    Wong NC; Nisbett GS; Harvell LA
    Health Commun; 2017 Apr; 32(4):451-460. PubMed ID: 27314311
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Australian Smokers' and Nonsmokers' Exposure to Antismoking Warnings in Day-to-Day Life: A Pilot Study.
    Schüz N; Ferguson SG
    Nicotine Tob Res; 2015 Jul; 17(7):876-81. PubMed ID: 25481914
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Which Type of Antismoking Advertisement Is Perceived as More Effective? An Experimental Study With a Sample of Australian Socially Disadvantaged Welfare Recipients.
    Guillaumier A; Bonevski B; Paul C; d'Este C; Durkin S; Doran C
    Am J Health Promot; 2017 May; 31(3):209-216. PubMed ID: 26559713
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 7.