ArticlePloS one2016
To Regulate or Not to Regulate? Views on Electronic Cigarette Regulations and Beliefs about the Reasons for and against Regulation.
Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Marketing awareness, professional experience, and support for e-cigarette advertising regulation among Polish legal professionals: a latent-class analysis.International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health · 2026Article
- Perceptions of e-Cigarettes and Heated Tobacco Products Among Never Users of Nicotine in the European Union.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
- Public Perceptions and Discussions of the US Food and Drug Administration's JUUL Ban Policy on Twitter: Observational Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
- Awareness and beliefs about FDA e-cigarette regulation in the premarket application review era.Addictive behaviors · 2023Article
- Public support for policies to regulate flavoured tobacco and e-cigarette products in rural California.Tobacco control · 2023Article
- Electronic cigarette survey characteristics.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2020Article
- An Examination of the Variation in Estimates of E-Cigarette Prevalence among U.S. Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Support for e-cigarette regulations among Australian young adults.BMC public health · 2019Article
- Arguments for amending smoke-free legislation in U.S. states to restrict use of electronic nicotine delivery systems.Preventive medicine reports · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPolicies designed to restrict marketing, access to, and public use of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are increasingly under debate in various jurisdictions in the US. Little is known about public perceptions of these policies and factors that predict their support or opposition.
methodsUsing a sample of US adults from Amazon Mechanical Turk in May 2015, this paper identifies beliefs about the benefits and costs of regulating e-cigarettes and identifies which of these beliefs predict support for e-cigarette restricting policies.
resultsA higher proportion of respondents agreed with 8 different reasons to regulate e-cigarettes (48.5% to 83.3% agreement) versus 7 reasons not to regulate e-cigarettes (11.5% to 18.9%). The majority of participants agreed with 7 out of 8 reasons for regulation. When all reasons to regulate or not were included in a final multivariable model, beliefs about protecting people from secondhand vapor and protecting youth from trying e-cigarettes significantly predicted stronger support for e-cigarette restricting policies, whereas concern about government intrusion into individual choices was associated with reduced support. DISCUSSION: This research identifies key beliefs that may underlie public support or opposition to policies designed to regulate the marketing and use of e-cigarettes. Advocates on both sides of the issue may find this research valuable in developing strategic campaigns related to the issue. IMPLICATIONS: Specific beliefs of potential benefits and costs of e-cigarette regulation (protecting youth, preventing exposure to secondhand vapor, and government intrusion into individual choices) may be effectively deployed by policy makers or health advocates in communicating with the public.
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.