Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27184265›Full record

ReviewRespiratory research2016

Ethical considerations of e-cigarette use for tobacco harm reduction.

Caroline Franck, Kristian B Filion, Jonathan Kimmelman, Roland Grad, Mark J Eisenberg

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Respiratory research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.3field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Overview of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems: A Systematic Review.American journal of preventive medicine · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Five-Day Changes in Biomarkers of Exposure Among Adult Smokers After Completely Switching From Combustible Cigarettes to a Nicotine-Salt Pod System.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020
    Trial
  3. Acute exposure to electronic cigarette components alters mRNA expression of pre-osteoblasts.FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology · 2024
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cigarette Use Among Older Adults: A Forgotten Population.American journal of public health · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. The Relationship Between Electronic Cigarette Use and Conventional Cigarette Smoking Is Largely Attributable to Shared Risk Factors.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020
    Article
  19. Knowledge and Beliefs of E-Cigarettes Among Physicians in Poland.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2019
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Caroline FranckCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Kristian B FilionCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Jonathan KimmelmanBiomedical Ethics Unit, McGill University Montreal, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Roland GradDepartment of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Mark J EisenbergCentre for Clinical Epidemiology, Lady Davis Institute, Jewish General Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada. mark.eisenberg@mcgill.ca.
McGill University · CAJewish General Hospital · CA

Funding

CIHR KRS-134302
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Due to their similarity to tobacco cigarettes, electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) could play an important role in tobacco harm reduction. However, the public health community remains divided concerning the appropriateness of endorsing a device whose safety and efficacy for smoking cessation remain unclear. We identified the major ethical considerations surrounding the use of e-cigarettes for tobacco harm reduction, including product safety, efficacy for smoking cessation and reduction, use among non-smokers, use among youth, marketing and advertisement, use in public places, renormalization of a smoking culture, and market ownership. Overall, the safety profile of e-cigarettes is unlikely to warrant serious public health concerns, particularly given the known adverse health effects associated with tobacco cigarettes. As a result, it is unlikely that the population-level harms resulting from e-cigarette uptake among non-smokers would overshadow the public health gains obtained from tobacco harm reduction among current smokers. While the existence of a gateway effect for youth remains uncertain, e-cigarette use in this population should be discouraged. Similarly, marketing and advertisement should remain aligned with the degree of known product risk and should be targeted to current smokers. Overall, the available evidence supports the cautionary implementation of harm reduction interventions aimed at promoting e-cigarettes as attractive and competitive alternatives to cigarette smoking, while taking measures to protect vulnerable groups and individuals.

Indexed as

Consumer Product SafetyRisk Reduction BehaviorCigarette SmokingCommerceDirect-to-Consumer AdvertisingElectronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsHarm ReductionHumansLung DiseasesProtective FactorsRisk AssessmentRisk FactorsSmokeSmoking CessationVapingSmokeE-cigarettesEthicsHarm reduction

Identifiers

PMID27184265
PMCPMC4869264
OpenAlexW2400266173

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.