Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31434028›Full record

Trial reportDrug and alcohol dependence2019

Effects of non-tobacco flavors and nicotine on e-cigarette product appeal among young adult never, former, and current smokers.

Adam M Leventhal, Nicholas I Goldenson, Jessica L Barrington-Trimis, Raina D Pang, Matthew G Kirkpatrick

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06506162 (The Effect of Flavor and Nicotine Strength on the Abuse Liability and Appeal of Oral Nicotine Products), which is not on this map. Cited by 58 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
58citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
6.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% 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.

NCT06506162 narecruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

The Effect of Flavor and Nicotine Strength on the Abuse Liability and Appeal of Oral Nicotine Products

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Southern CaliforniaRan2024 to 2028Enrolled320ConditionsNicotine DependenceArmsFlavor, Nicotine concentration
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

58 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Appeal and Sensory Characteristics of Oral Nicotine Products in Young Adults Who Vape E-Cigarettes.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026
    Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Nontobacco Nicotine Dependence as a Risk Factor for Poor Long-Term Outcomes After Shoulder Arthroplasty and Rotator Cuff Repair.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Preclinical Evidence of the Effects of Sweet Flavors: Sweetness Increases Nicotine Intake and Seeking.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. A Patchy Prohibition: Product and Flavor Substitution After the Food and Drug Administration's Prioritized Enforcement Policy on Flavored E-cigarettes.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2024
    Article
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

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Adam M LeventhalDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. Electronic address: adam.leventhal@usc.edu.
Nicholas I GoldensonDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Jessica L Barrington-TrimisDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Raina D PangDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Matthew G KirkpatrickDepartment of Preventive Medicine, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
University of Southern California · US

Funding

USC/NORRIS COMPREHENSIVE CANCER CENTER (CORE) SUPPORTP30CA014089 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Fumito Ito · 1985 to 2026
$181.4M
USC Tobacco Center of Regulatory ScienceU54CA180905 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Jennifer Beth Unger · 2018 to 2026
$39.0M
USC Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science (TCORS) for Vulnerable PopulationsP50CA180905 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI PENTZ, MARY ANN, SAMET, JONATHAN M · 2013 to 2017
$20.1M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA014089NCI NIH HHS P50 CA180905NCI NIH HHS U54 CA180905
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundE-cigarette regulations targeting products that disproportionately appeal to never-smokers may optimize population health. This laboratory study of young adults tested whether differences in appeal between e-cigarettes with non-tobacco-flavored (vs. tobacco-flavored) and nicotine-containing (vs. nicotine-free) solutions varied by smoking history.

methodsCurrent (N = 53), former (N = 25), and never (N = 22) cigarette smokers who vape (Mean[SD] age = 25.4[4.4] years) administered standardized e-cigarette doses varied by a Flavor (fruit, menthol, tobacco) × Nicotine (nicotine-containing [6 mg/mL], nicotine-free) within-subject double-blind design. Participants rated each dose's appeal (0-100 scale). Covariate-adjusted interactions tested whether smoking history moderated flavor and nicotine effects.

resultsAppeal was higher for fruit and menthol than tobacco flavors in each group. The fruit vs. tobacco appeal difference was greater in never smokers (fruit-tobacco estimate = 19.6) than current smokers (estimate = 12.1) but not former smokers (estimate = 12.6). The menthol vs. tobacco difference was greater in never smokers (menthol-tobacco estimate = 17.3) than former (estimate = 6.0) and current (estimate = 7.2) smokers. Appeal was lower for nicotine-containing than nicotine-free solutions in each group; this difference was greater in never smokers (nicotine-nicotine-free estimate = -17.3) than former (estimate = -7.0) and current (estimate = -10.6) smokers. Compared to tobacco flavors, nicotine's appeal-reducing effects were suppressed by fruit and menthol flavors in never smokers.

conclusionsHigher appeal of non-tobacco-flavored (vs. tobacco-flavored) and lower appeal of nicotine-containing (vs. nicotine-free) e-cigarettes may be widespread in young adults but disproportionately amplified in never smokers. Non-tobacco flavors may suppress nicotine's appeal-lowering qualities in never smokers. The impact of regulating non-tobacco flavors in e-cigarettes may vary by smoking history.

Indexed as

AdultConsumer BehaviorDouble-Blind MethodElectronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsFemaleFlavoring AgentsHumansMaleNicotianaNicotineSmokersYoung AdultFlavoring AgentsNicotinee-CigarettesFlavorsProduct appealTobacco regulatory scienceYoung adults

Identifiers

PMID31434028
PMCPMC7489757
OpenAlexW2965542329

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

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.