ArticleExperimental and clinical psychopharmacology2020
Abuse liability of electronic cigarettes in men who are experienced electronic cigarette users.
Article in Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Abuse Liability of Electronic Cigarettes in Never-Smoking Electronic Cigarette Users.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Trial
- Randomized clinical studies assessing the pharmacokinetics and subjective effects of vuse alto electronic nicotine delivery systems.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Electronic cigarette cue reactivity in exclusive electronic cigarette users.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2025Article
- Expanding on cross-price elasticity: Understanding tobacco product demand and substitution from the cross-price purchase task.Journal of the experimental analysis of behavior · 2024Article
- Secondhand electronic cigarette aerosol in vehicles impacts indoor air quality.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2023Article
- Article
- Reinforcement enhancement by nicotine: A novel abuse-liability assessment of e-cigarettes in young adults.Experimental and clinical psychopharmacology · 2022Article
- Recent findings in the pharmacology of inhaled nicotine: Preclinical and clinical in vivo studies.Neuropharmacology · 2020Review
- Are Urine Propylene Glycol or Vegetable Glycerin Markers of E-cigarette Use or Abstinence?Tobacco regulatory science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Most electronic cigarettes (e-cigs) aerosolize a nicotine-containing liquid that users inhale. Few experimental studies have examined e-cig abuse liability (the extent to which use of these products may lead to persistent and/or problematic use). In this study, 24 experienced male e-cig users completed 4 sessions that differed byproduct used: own e-cig (OWN), an eGo e-cig filled with participants' own brand/flavor liquid in 0 mg/mL nicotine (e-cig0), an eGo e-cig filled with the highest nicotine concentration available in participants' own brand/flavor (e-cighighest), and a U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved nicotine inhaler (IN). Outcome measures included crossover point on the multiple-choice procedure, plasma nicotine delivery, and subjective effect profile. After 10 puffs, a significantly higher mean crossover point was observed for OWN at $1.35 (SD = 0.90) compared to e-cighighest at $0.88 (SD = 0.89), e-cig0 at $0.83 (SD = 0.79), and IN at $0.72 (SD = 0.84). Significant increases in mean plasma nicotine concentration were observed for OWN at 7.94 ng/mL (SD = 6.19) and e-cighighest at 7.51 ng/mL (SD = 5.39). Significant reductions in abstinence symptom suppression and higher ratings of satisfaction were observed for OWN and e-cighighest, with significantly less suppression and lower ratings of satisfaction for e-cig0 and IN. These findings suggest that human laboratory methods can be used to assess e-cig abuse liability and that nicotine-containing e-cigs have greater abuse liability than nicotine-free e-cigs and the IN. Potential regulations intended to limit e-cig abuse liability should be tested using these or similar procedures. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).
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.