Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31649912›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in public health2019

Heated Tobacco Products: A Review of Current Knowledge and Initial Assessments.

Nadja Mallock, Elke Pieper, Christoph Hutzler, Frank Henkler-Stephani, Andreas Luch

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.3field-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.

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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 120 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. The respiratory health effects of heated tobacco product aerosols in a primary human airway epithelial cell model.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026
    Article
  7. Risk Assessment Models for Heated Tobacco Products.Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis · 2026
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. 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.

Nadja MallockDepartment of Chemical and Product Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
Elke PieperDepartment of Chemical and Product Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
Christoph HutzlerDepartment of Chemical and Product Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
Frank Henkler-StephaniDepartment of Chemical and Product Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
Andreas LuchDepartment of Chemical and Product Safety, German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR), Berlin, Germany.
Federal Institute for Risk Assessment · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The health risks of tobacco smoking have been documented in numerous studies and smoking rates have declined in developed countries over the last 50 years. Today, we know that cigarette smoking is the major cause of preventable deaths due to tobacco smoke induced diseases. As a consequence of an increased awareness of smoking-related health risks, heated tobacco products (HTPs) are marketed as reduced toxicant alternatives to conventional tobacco products. Manufacturers claim that levels of toxicants and hazardous compounds are significantly reduced, implying that inhalation of the modified aerosol is less harmful compared to conventional cigarettes. In this manuscript, previous assessments of HTPs are briefly summarized, including a short discussion on challenges with the adaption of standard analytical methods used for tobacco smoke. The reliability of analytical data is important for risk assessment approaches that are based on reduced toxicant exposure. In order to assess a putative reduction of health risks, an integrated study design is required that should include clinical studies and epidemiology data. One manufacturer applied for a classification as a Modified Risk Tobacco Product (MRTP) in the United States, based on extensive toxicological studies that have also been published. However, data are not yet sufficient for a reliable assessment or recognition of putatively reduced health risks. Challenges regarding a classification in Europe are also discussed briefly in this review.

Indexed as

emissionsharm reductionheated tobacco productsrisk assessmenttobacco smoke

Identifiers

PMID31649912
PMCPMC6795920
OpenAlexW2979314109

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.