ArticleBMJ open2019
Product attributes important to US adult consumers' use of electronic nicotine delivery systems: a discrete choice experiment.
Article in BMJ open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Features of mHealth Apps for Tobacco Cessation Important to Black Adults: Discrete Choice Experiment.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Device color influences e-cigarette flavor expectations, perception, and appeal.Chemical senses · 2026Article
- Canadian Youth Preferences for E-Cigarettes: A Discrete Choice Experiment.Tobacco use insights · 2025Article
- General and Device-Specific Reasons for ENDS Use: A Qualitative Study with Adult ENDS Users.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- Preferences for different features of ENDS products by tobacco product use: a latent class analysis.Substance abuse treatment, prevention, and policy · 2022Article
- E-cigarettes: How can they help smokers quit without addicting a new generation?Preventive medicine · 2020Article
- Vaping: An Emerging Health Hazard.Cureus · 2020Review
- Perceived Comparative Harm of Cigarettes and Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems.JAMA network open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo understand the importance of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) product attributes to adult consumers in the USA by age and gender.
designCross-sectional survey with a discrete choice experiment (best-worst, case 2, scaling) of 19 choice tasks in which participants answered what would make them most want to use and least want to use an ENDS product. SETTING AND
participantsA national sample of adults (aged 18+ years) in the USA who had tried an ENDS product at least once. MEASURES: We included 9 ENDS attributes with levels that varied across 19 choice tasks. We performed a multinomial logistic regression to obtain overall importance scores, attribute-level part-worth utilities and most important attribute.
resultsOf 660 participants, 81% were white, 51% women and 37% had at least a 4-year college degree with an average age of 42.0 years (SD ±19.4). The attributes had the following importance:
conclusionThis study identified the importance of nine ENDS attributes. Perceived
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.