ArticlePreventing chronic disease2017
Perceptions of Harm to Children Exposed to Secondhand Aerosol From Electronic Vapor Products, Styles Survey, 2015.
Article in Preventing chronic disease, 2017. 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, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Health Effects from Secondhand Exposure to E-Cigarettes: A Systematic Review of Peer-Reviewed Articles from 2004-2024.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Pooled it
- Parental Dual Use of e-Cigarettes and Traditional Cigarettes.Academic pediatricsTrial
- Exploratory untargeted metabolomics analysis reveals differences in metabolite profiles in pregnant people exposed vs. unexposed to E-cigarettes secondhand in the NYU children's health and environment study.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2025Article
- Caregiver restrictions on child access to tobacco in the home and home Smoking/Vaping bans among Black/African American women caregivers who smoke and live in Resource-limited, rural areas.Preventive medicine reports · 2024Article
- Harm perceptions of secondhand e-cigarette aerosol among youth in the United States.Addictive behaviors · 2023Article
- Passive exposure to e-cigarette emissions is associated with worsened mental health.BMC public health · 2022Article
- Harm Perceptions of Tobacco/Nicotine Products and Child Exposure: Differences between Non-Users, Cigarette-Exclusive, and Electronic Cigarette-Exclusive Users.Tobacco use insights · 2021Article
- Vaping in the Workplace: Prevalence and Attitudes Among Employed US Adults.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 2021Article
- 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 Use in US Households With Children: The "New" Secondhand Smoke.JAMA pediatrics · 2019Article
- Why Don't More Smokers Switch to Using E-Cigarettes: The Views of Confirmed Smokers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2017Article
- Impact of Presence of Children on Indoor Tobacco Restrictions in Households of Urban and Rural Adult Tobacco Users.Academic pediatricsObservational
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe US Surgeon General has concluded that e-cigarette aerosol is not harmless and can contain harmful and potentially harmful chemicals, including nicotine. We assessed factors associated with adults' perceptions of harm related to children's exposure to secondhand aerosol from electronic vapor products (EVPs).
methodsData came from the 2015 Styles, an Internet panel survey of US adults aged 18 years or older (n = 4,127). Respondents were asked whether they believe aerosol from other people's EVPs causes children harm. Harm perceptions were assessed overall and by cigarette smoking, EVP use, and sociodemographic characteristics. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess odds of perceived harm.
resultsOverall, 5.3% of adults responded that secondhand EVP exposure caused "no harm" to children, 39.9% responded "little harm" or "some harm," 21.5% responded "a lot of harm," and 33.3% responded "don't know." Odds of "no harm" response were greater among men than among women, current and former cigarette smokers than among never smokers, and current and former EVP users than among never users; odds were lower among non-Hispanic blacks, Hispanics, and non-Hispanic other races than among non-Hispanic whites. Odds of responding "don't know" were greater among men, current cigarette smokers, and current and former EVP users; odds were lower among those aged 45 to 64 years than those aged 18 to 24 years and lower among non-Hispanic other races and Hispanics than non-Hispanic whites.
conclusionTwo-fifths of US adults believe that children's exposure to secondhand EVP aerosol causes some or little harm, while one-third do not know whether it causes harm. Efforts are warranted to educate the public about the health risks of secondhand EVP aerosol, particularly for children.
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.