ArticleBMJ open2015
Perception of electronic cigarettes in the general population: does their usefulness outweigh their risks?
Article in BMJ open, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Overview of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: A Systematic Review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2017Pooled it
- Article
- E-cigarette use among Ecuadorian adults: A national cross-sectional study on use rates, perceptions, and associated factors.Tobacco induced diseases · 2024Article
- An online survey of Malaysian long-term e-cigarette user perceptions.Tobacco induced diseases · 2020Article
- Article
- Perceived health risks of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) users: The role of cigarette smoking status.Addictive behaviors · 2019Article
- Practice Patterns and Perceptions of Chest Health Care Providers on Electronic Cigarette Use: An In-Depth Discussion and Report of Survey Results.Journal of smoking cessation · 2018Article
- Comparison of Bladder Carcinogens in the Urine of E-cigarette Users Versus Non E-cigarette Using Controls.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Secondhand exposure to e-cigarette aerosols among smokers: A cross-sectional study in six European countries of the EUREST-PLUS ITC Europe Surveys.Tobacco induced diseases · 2018Article
- Prevalence of use and perceptions of risk of novel and other alternative tobacco products among sexual minority adults: Results from an online national survey, 2014-2015.Preventive medicine · 2017Article
- Perceptions of Harm to Children Exposed to Secondhand Aerosol From Electronic Vapor Products, Styles Survey, 2015.Preventing chronic disease · 2017Article
- Perceptions of harm from electronic-cigarette use among a sample of US Navy personnel.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe and compare the perceptions of the general population about the harmful effects of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) on users and on those passively exposed to e-cigarettes and the perceptions about e-cigarette usefulness for reducing or eliminating tobacco smoking. DESIGN, SETTING, AND
participantsWe analysed cross-sectional data from a longitudinal study of a representative sample of the general adult (≥16 years) population of Barcelona, Spain (336 men and 400 women). The fieldwork was conducted between May 2013 and February 2014. We computed the percentages, adjusted OR and their corresponding 95% CI among participants with some awareness of e-cigarettes (79.2% of the sample). PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: We assessed the perception about harmfulness for e-cigarette users and for passively exposed non-e-cigarette users, as well as the perception of usefulness for smokers of cigarette cessation and reduction.
resultsIn this sample, 40.1% thought that e-cigarettes had a harmful effect on users, and 27.1% thought that e-cigarettes had a harmful effect on passively exposed bystanders (p<0.001). Particularly, more never-smokers perceived that e-cigarettes had harmful effects on passively exposed bystanders than current smokers (34.4% vs 20.6%; OR=1.93, 95% CI 1.02 to 3.63). More people perceived e-cigarettes as being useful for reducing smoking than for quitting (50.6% vs 29.9%, p<0.001), as well as for reducing smoking than as being harmful to users (50.6% vs 40.1%, p=0.044). DISCUSSION: The perception that e-cigarettes are useful for reducing tobacco consumption was more prevalent than the perception that e-cigarettes are harmful to users and to those passively exposed to e-cigarettes. Advertisements and messages about the use of e-cigarettes and their harmful effects should be regulated and based on scientific evidence to avoid creating erroneous ideas about their use.
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.