ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2019
Socioeconomic Inequalities in e-Cigarette Use in Korea: Comparison with Inequalities in Conventional Cigarette Use Using Two National Surveys.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- The prevalence of electronic cigarettes vaping globally: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2022Pooled it
- Trends in socioeconomic inequality in e-cigarette use among adolescents in South Korea.Tobacco induced diseases · 2024Article
- Reasons for Initiation and Regular Use of Heated Tobacco Products among Current and Former Smokers in South Korea: Findings from the 2020 ITC Korea Survey.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Perceptions of harmfulness of heated tobacco and nicotine vaping products compared to cigarettes, and the association of advertising exposure on harm perceptions among adults who smoke in South Korea: Cross-sectional findings from the 2020 ITC Korea Survey.Tobacco induced diseases · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Socioeconomic inequalities in conventional cigarette smoking are well established in developed countries. The aim of this study was to investigate socioeconomic inequalities in e-cigarette use in Korea, in comparison with inequalities in conventional cigarette use. Data from the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) and the Korea Community Health Survey (KCHS) were analyzed. The years of data collected were 2013 to 2016 for the KNHANES and 2014 to 2016 for the KCHS, respectively. The age-adjusted prevalence of ever and current e-cigarette use and conventional cigarette use was calculated according to socioeconomic status indicators, including education, occupation, and income. The prevalence of ever e-cigarette use in men increased from 12.1% in 2013 to 19.2% in 2016 in the KNHANES, and from 13.4% in 2014 to 17.9% in 2016 in the KCHS. Ever and current e-cigarette use was concentrated among current smokers and was much more prevalent among men and also more common among younger age groups in men and women. There was higher prevalences of conventional cigarette use among men and women with less education, manual occupational class and lower income, with the differences more pronounced for women. There was higher ever and current use of e-cigarettes among women with less education, manual occupational class and lower income, but among men there was much less difference in e-cigarette use by these indicators of socio-economic status.
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.