Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31495244›Full record

ReviewExpert opinion on drug delivery2019

What is the nicotine delivery profile of electronic cigarettes?

Natalie Voos, Maciej L Goniewicz, Thomas Eissenberg

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Expert opinion on drug delivery, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

79 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pulmonary effects of e-liquid flavors: a systematic review.Journal of toxicology and environmental health. Part B, Critical reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  3. 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 · 2025
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

19 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors.

Natalie VoosDepartment of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center , Buffalo , NY , USA.
Maciej L GoniewiczDepartment of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center , Buffalo , NY , USA.
Thomas EissenbergDepartment of Psychology, Virginia Commonwealth University , Richmond , VA , USA.

Funding

Project 4: Using a prospective cohort survey to test population-level predictions generated by Projects 1-3U54DA036105 · NIDA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI COBB, CAROLINE O · 2018 to 2022
$20.8M
WNY Center for Research on Flavored Tobacco Products (CRoFT)U54CA228110 · NCI · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI OSSIP, DEBORAH J · 2018 to 2022
$19.8M
Nicotine delivery from novel non tobacco electronic systemsR01DA037446 · NIDA · ROSWELL PARK CANCER INSTITUTE CORP · PI GONIEWICZ, MACIEJ LUKASZ · 2014 to 2016
$1.7M
NCI NIH HHS U54 CA228110NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA037446NIDA NIH HHS U54 DA036105
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsAerosolsAnimalsEquipment DesignHumansNicotineAerosolsNicotineaddictiondependencee-cigarettesnicotinetobacco control

Identifiers

PMID31495244
PMCPMC6814574

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.