Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Jul 2.
Published before final editing as: Tob Control. 2023 Jan 2:tobaccocontrol-2022-057553. doi: 10.1136/tc-2022-057553

Table 2.

Effects of Nicotine Formulation on Appeal and Sensory Attributes

Estimates, 𝛽 (95% CI)
Appeal Sensory attributes
Liking Disliking Willingness to use again Sweetness Smoothness Bitterness Harshness
Formulation: Lactic
50% Lactic vs. Free-base 5.3*
(1.8, 8.7)		 −6.5*
(−10.3, −2.8)		 6.2*
(2.5, 9.9)		 6.2*
(2.6, 9.8)		 11.5*
(8.0, 14.9)		 −8.3*
(−11.7, −5.0)		 −14.9*
(−18.5, −11.3)
100% Lactic vs Free-base 10.8*
(7.3, 14.2)		 −13.8*
(−17.6, −10.1)		 11.5*
(7.8, 15.2)		 8.2*
(4.7, 11.8)		 18.2*
(14.7, 21.6)		 −13.3*
(−16.7, −9.9)		 −21.8*
(−25.5, −18.2)
Formulation: Benzoic
50% Benzoic vs. Free-base 8.0*
(4.4, 11.6)		 −9.7v
(−13.5, −5.8)		 8.2*
(4.4, 12.1)		 6.6*
(3.0, 10.1)		 15.5*
(12.0, 18.9)		 −10.7*
(−14.1, −7.2)		 −18.5*
(−22.2, −14.9)
100% Benzoic vs Free-base 10.8*
(7.2, 14.3)		 −12.6*
(−16.5, −8.8)		 10.3*
(6.4, 14.1)		 10.6*
(7.1, 14.2)		 20.0*
(16.5, 23.4)		 −13.7*
(−17.1, −10.3)		 −22.9*
(−26.6, −19.3)
*

Statistically significant after Benjamini-Hochberg corrections for multiple testing to control the false-discovery rate at 0.05.