Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30945898›Full record

ArticleThe American psychologist2019

Answering questions about electronic cigarettes using a multidisciplinary model.

Alison Breland, Robert L Balster, Caroline Cobb, Pebbles Fagan, Jonathan Foulds, J Randy Koch, Thokozeni Lipato, Najat Saliba, Alan Shihadeh, Shumei Sun and 1 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American psychologist, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 49% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Alison BrelandCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.ORCID 0000-0001-8949-2395
Robert L BalsterCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.
Caroline CobbCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.ORCID 0000-0003-3258-252X
Pebbles FaganCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.
Jonathan FouldsCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.ORCID 0000-0003-2296-0726
J Randy KochCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.
Thokozeni LipatoCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.
Najat SalibaCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.ORCID 0000-0002-4276-1524
Alan ShihadehCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.ORCID 0000-0001-6387-8564
Shumei SunCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.
Thomas EissenbergCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products.ORCID 0000-0002-8277-5437

Funding

Project 4: Using a prospective cohort survey to test population-level predictions generated by Projects 1-3U54DA036105 · NIDA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI FAGAN, PEBBLES · 2018 to 2022
$20.8M
Training and Education Core p270-287P50DA036105 · NIDA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI EISSENBERG, THOMAS EVAN · 2013 to 2017
$19.2M
Center for Tobacco Products; U.S. Food and Drug AdministrationNIDA NIH HHS P50 DA036105NIDA NIH HHS U54 DA036105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electronic cigarettes (ECIGs) are a relatively new class of tobacco products and a subject of much debate for scientists and policymakers worldwide. Objective data that address the ECIG risk-benefit ratio for individual and public health are needed, and addressing this need requires a multidisciplinary approach that spans several areas of psychology as well as chemistry, toxicant inhalation, and physiology. This multidisciplinary approach would benefit from methods that are reliable, valid, and swift. For this reason, we formed a multidisciplinary team to develop methods that could answer questions about ECIGs and other potential modified risk tobacco products. Our team includes scientists with expertise in psychology (clinical, community, and experimental) and other disciplines, including aerosol research, analytical chemistry, biostatistics, engineering, internal medicine, and public health. The psychologists on our team keep other members focused on factors that influence individual behavior, and other team members keep the psychologists aware of other issues, such as product design. Critically, all team members are willing to extend their interests beyond the boundaries of their discipline to collaborate effectively with the shared goal of producing the rigorous science needed to inform empirically based tobacco policy. In addition, our trainees gain valuable knowledge from these collaborations and learn that other disciplines are accessible, exciting, and can enhance their own research. Multidisciplinary work presents challenges: learning other scientists' languages and staying focused on our core mission. Overall, our multidisciplinary team has led to several major findings that inform the scientific, regulatory, and public health communities about ECIGs and their effects. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsHealth CommunicationHealth EducationInterdisciplinary StudiesPsychologyHumans

Identifiers

PMID30945898
PMCPMC6450402
OpenAlexW2933222304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.