ArticleRisk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis2017
Knowledge about Chemicals in e-Cigarette Secondhand Vapor and Perceived Harms of Exposure among a National Sample of U.S. Adults.
Article in Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mobile Text Messaging for Tobacco Risk Communication Among Young Adult Community College Students: Randomized Trial of Project Debunk.JMIR mHealth and uHealth · 2021Trial
- Insights Into Electronic-Cigarette Perspectives: Smokers' Knowledge Attitudes and Practices at Hamad Medical Corporation, 2020.Substance abuse and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Article
- Electronic Cigarettes: Exposure to Secondhand Vapors at a Long-Term Healthcare Company.Journal of nursing education and practice · 2021Article
- It's Just Steam: a qualitative analysis of New Zealand ENDS users' perceptions of secondhand aerosol.Tobacco control · 2021Article
- Vaping in the Workplace: Prevalence and Attitudes Among Employed US Adults.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 2021Article
- Statewide Prevalence of Smoke-Free and Vape-Free Homes, by Tobacco Product Use, Minnesota, 2018.Preventing chronic disease · 2020Article
- Home smoking and vaping policies among US adults: results from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, wave 3.Preventive medicine · 2020Article
- Electronic cigarette survey characteristics.Journal of community hospital internal medicine perspectives · 2020Article
- Validation of mobile phone text messages for nicotine and tobacco risk communication among college students: A content analysis.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 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
4 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Potentially harmful chemicals are detectable in e-cigarette secondhand vapor (hereafter SHV), contrary to advertising and marketing claims that it contains "only water vapor." We assessed public knowledge about the presence of chemicals in SHV and associations between knowledge and perceived harms of exposure to SHV. We conducted an online survey of a nationally representative sample of 1,449 U.S. adults (GfK's KnowledgePanel) from October to December 2013. Respondents were asked whether e-cigarette vapor contains only water vapor, contains tar, or contains formaldehyde (true/ false/ do not know). Responses to these three items were recoded (1 = incorrect, 2 = do not know, and 3 = correct) and averaged into a knowledge scale. They were also asked if they perceived breathing SHV to be harmful to one's health (two-item scale) and comparative harm of breathing SHV versus breathing secondhand smoke (SHS). Multiple regression analyses were weighted to the U.S. adult population and adjusted for potential confounders. Most respondents (58-75%) reported not knowing whether SHV contained only water vapor, if SHV contained tar, and if it contained formaldehyde. African-American respondents (vs. white) and current smokers (vs. nonsmokers) had lower levels of knowledge about chemicals in SHV. Adjusting for covariates, correct knowledge about chemicals in SHV was associated with higher perceived harms about SHV for one's health and perceived comparative harm of SHV versus SHS. These findings suggest a need to provide accurate information about the presence of chemicals in SHV (e.g., using product ingredient labels or public education).
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.