ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2019
Randomized within-subject trial to evaluate smokers' initial perceptions, subjective effects and nicotine delivery across six vaporized nicotine products.
Article in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 6 of them syntheses 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of sweet/fruit-flavored disposable electronic cigarettes on early nicotine initiation - a systematic review.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- The Role of Nicotine and Flavor in the Abuse Potential and Appeal of Electronic Cigarettes for Adult Current and Former Cigarette and Electronic Cigarette Users: A Systematic Review.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2022Pooled it
- Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Abuse liability of two electronic nicotine delivery systems compared with combustible cigarettes and nicotine gum from an open-label randomized crossover study.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Part two: an unblinded, parallel, randomized study to assess nicotine pharmacokinetics of four Vuse Solo ENDS flavors in smokers.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Part one: abuse liability of Vuse Solo (G2) electronic nicotine delivery system relative to combustible cigarettes and nicotine gum.Scientific reports · 2022Trial
- Nicotine pharmacokinetics and subjective responses after using nicotine pouches with different nicotine levels compared to combustible cigarettes and moist smokeless tobacco in adult tobacco users.Psychopharmacology · 2022Trial
- A randomised, crossover, clinical study to assess nicotine pharmacokinetics and subjective effects of the BIDIHarm reduction journal · 2022Trial
- Effect of e-cigarette flavors on nicotine delivery and puffing topography: results from a randomized clinical trial of daily smokers.Psychopharmacology · 2020Trial
- Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling to Predict Nicotine Pharmacokinetics of Nicotine Pouches Under Naturalistic Use Conditions.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2025Article
- Article
- Disposable e-cigarettes and their nicotine delivery, usage pattern, and subjective effects in occasionally smoking adults.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Nicotine information disclosed online by e-cigarette brands popular with young people.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2024Article
- Using an experimental tobacco marketplace to pilot test the substitutability of JUUL e-cigarettes and other alternative nicotine and tobacco products for conventional cigarettes among vulnerable populations.Preventive medicine · 2022Article
- Comparison of e-cigarette use prevalence and frequency by smoking status among youth in the United States, 2014-19.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2021Article
- Vaping-Related Adverse Events and Perceived Health Improvements: A Cross-Sectional Survey among Daily E-Cigarette Users.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Public health implications of vaping in the USA: the smoking and vaping simulation model.Population health metrics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsVaporized nicotine products (VNPs) can vary in important characteristics including size, shape, flavor and nicotine yield. We examined whether complex interactions among these characteristics could affect smokers' VNP perceptions and usage patterns.
designA within-subject randomized cross-over trial.
settingRoswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA.
participantsEighteen daily cigarette smokers. MEASUREMENTS: Participants attended eight weekly visits during which they sampled six different VNPs (disposable, rechargeable, eGO, mod, e-Cigar and e-Pipe) with tobacco-flavored e-liquid. Prior to device use, participants completed product-ranking questionnaires. Participants completed controlled puffing sessions during each of the six trials, after which satisfaction questionnaires were completed and blood samples were taken.
findingsInitial perceptions showed that the smallest device (disposable) was ranked as safer compared with a larger device (e-Pipe) (P < 0.05). Participants rated the eGO and mod devices higher on satisfaction and enjoyment from use, taste, pleasantness, harshness ('throat hit') and speed of effect, but lower on perceived health risk and embarrassment from use (P < 0.05). All devices had a lower C
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.