ArticleTobacco induced diseases2017
In-person retail marketing claims in tobacco and E-cigarette shops in Southern California.
Article in Tobacco induced diseases, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- A new form of nicotine retailers: a systematic review of the sales and marketing practices of vape shops.Tobacco control · 2018Pooled it
- Marketing strategies in business-to-business advertisements for oral nicotine products.Tobacco control · 2026Article
- Marketing claims, promotional strategies, and product information on Malaysian e-cigarette retailer websites-a content analysis.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2024Article
- A geospatial analysis of age disparities in resolute localities of tobacco and vaping-specific storefronts in California.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2021Article
- Health claims made in vape shops: an observational study and content analysis.Tobacco control · 2019Observational
- A Peek Past the Vape Clouds: Vape Shop Decline in Long Beach, California during 2015-2018.Tobacco regulatory science · 2019Article
- A qualitative exploration of information-seeking by electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) users in New Zealand.BMJ open · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundE-cigarette use has been increasing in the United States, though knowledge of potential risks and harms associated with e-cigarette use is low. Marketing of e-cigarettes may serve as a source of information to shape beliefs and attitudes toward e-cigarettes. The purpose of this study was to identify the most common marketing claims made within "vape" and tobacco shops in sales interactions with customers in demographically diverse cities.
methodsVape and tobacco shops from three diverse cities in Southern California were selected for inclusion in the study. From May 2015 to July 2015, simulated customers asked salespeople in vape and tobacco shops how e-cigarettes compare to conventional cigarettes, and then recorded the resulting claims that were made using a standardized form designed for this purpose. Data were analyzed from January to March 2016.
resultsThe most frequent claims made by sales staff were that: smoking e-cigarettes helps one quit smoking (57% of the simulated shopping interactions), e-cigarettes come in multiple flavors (54%), and e-cigarettes are healthier than conventional cigarettes (50%). Simulated customer interactions that took place in vape shops included more positive marketing claims than those that occurred in tobacco shops; this relationship approached statistical significance (
conclusionsA wide range of marketing claims are made about e-cigarettes in retail settings. These may vary by geographic location, community demographics, and type of retail outlet.
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.