ReviewBMC medicine2015
E-cigarettes: methodological and ideological issues and research priorities.
Review in BMC medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Heat-not-burn tobacco products: a systematic literature review.Tobacco control · 2019Pooled it
- Healthcare providers' beliefs about the health effects of nicotine and electronic cigarettes.PloS one · 2026Article
- Exploring the gateway hypothesis of e-cigarettes and tobacco: a prospective replication study among adolescents in the Netherlands and Flanders.Tobacco control · 2023Article
- Influence of electronic cigarette liquid flavors and nicotine concentration on subjective measures of abuse liability in young adult cigarette smokers.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2019Article
- An Examination of the Variation in Estimates of E-Cigarette Prevalence among U.S. Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- E-cigarette initiation and associated changes in smoking cessation and reduction: the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study, 2013-2015.Tobacco control · 2019Article
- Evidentiary Support in Public Comments to the FDA's Center for Tobacco Products.Journal of health politics, policy and law · 2017Article
- E-cigarette use and associated changes in population smoking cessation: evidence from US current population surveys.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2017Article
- 'Maybe they should regulate them quite strictly until they know the true dangers': a focus group study exploring UK adolescents' views on e-cigarette regulation.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2016Article
- Revisiting the Rise of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems Using Search Query Surveillance.American journal of preventive medicine · 2016Article
- Knowledge and Perceptions about Nicotine, Nicotine Replacement Therapies and Electronic Cigarettes among Healthcare Professionals in Greece.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2016Article
- E-Cigarette Use Among Never-Smoking California Students.American journal of public health · 2015Article
- Regulation in the face of uncertainty: the evidence on electronic nicotine delivery systems (e-cigarettes).Risk management and healthcare policy · 2015Review
- Influence of legislations and news on Indian internet search query patterns of e-cigarettes.Journal of oral and maxillofacial pathology : JOMFPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cigarette combustion, rather than either tobacco or nicotine, is the cause of a public health disaster. Fortunately, several new technologies that vaporize nicotine or tobacco, and may make cigarettes obsolete, have recently appeared. Research priorities include the effects of vaporizers on smoking cessation and initiation, their safety and toxicity, use by non-smokers, dual use of vaporizers and cigarettes, passive vaping, renormalization of smoking, and the development of messages that effectively communicate the continuum of risk for tobacco and nicotine products. A major difficulty is that we are chasing a moving target. New products constantly appear, and research results are often obsolete by the time they are published. Vaporizers do not need to be safe, only safer than cigarettes. However, harm reduction principles are often misunderstood or rejected. In the context of a fierce ideological debate, and major investments by the tobacco industry, it is crucial that independent researchers provide regulators and the public with evidence-based guidance. The methodological and ideological hurdles on this path are discussed in this commentary.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.