ArticleHealth behavior and policy review2016
Electronic Cigarette Use among Current Smokers: A Pilot Qualitative Study.
Article in Health behavior and policy review, 2016. 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.
- Communicating risk differences between electronic and combusted cigarettes: the role of the FDA-mandated addiction warning and a nicotine fact sheet.Tobacco control · 2020Trial
- Targeted Versus Nontargeted Communication About Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems in Three Smoker Groups.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Trial
- "When I Don't Have a Cigarette It's Helpful, but It Really Don't Satisfy:" Qualitative Study of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) Use among Low-Income Smokers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Sensory experiences and cues among E-cigarette users.Harm reduction journal · 2020Article
- A Practice Theory Approach to Understanding Poly-Tobacco Use in the United States.Critical public health · 2020Article
- A qualitative study of e-cigarette use among young people in Ireland: Incentives, disincentives, and putative cessation.PloS one · 2020Article
- Testing messages about comparative risk of electronic cigarettes and combusted cigarettes.Tobacco control · 2019Article
- A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Multiple Tobacco Product Use and the Impact of Regulatory Action.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2019Review
- Dual use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) and smoked tobacco: a qualitative analysis.Tobacco control · 2019Article
- Perceptions and Reasons Regarding E-Cigarette Use among Users and Non-Users: A Narrative Literature Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018Review
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
Abstract
objectiveThis pilot study explored psychosocial influences of e-cigarette use among dual users.
methodsTwo focus groups among adult current smokers who had ever used e-cigarettes were conducted in Georgia. Discussions were audio-recorded. Principles of grounded theory and thematic analysis were employed.
resultsReasons for initial use included curiosity and social influence. Themes related to regular use included enjoyment of sensory experiences and perception of reduced harm. Nicotine craving, social image, and convenience were reasons for initial and regular dual use. Two patterns of use emerged - (1) using e-cigarettes to supplement combustible cigarettes; and (2) to replace combustible cigarettes.
conclusionsReasons for dual use were related to nicotine dependence, social influence, product appeal, and perception of reduced harm. Understanding contextual nuances of dual use can inform policy and communication.
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.