Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32036787›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2020

Socioeconomic patterning of vaping by smoking status among UK adults and youth.

Michael J Green, Linsay Gray, Helen Sweeting, Michaela Benzeval

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Article
  7. Who Reports Greater Chronic Disease Risk Behaviours? A Closer Look at Sociodemographic Differences Among Australian Adolescents: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael J GreenMRC/CSO Social & Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, 200 Renfield Street, Glasgow, G2 3AX, UK. michael.green@glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3193-2452
Linsay GrayMRC/CSO Social & Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, 200 Renfield Street, Glasgow, G2 3AX, UK.
Helen SweetingMRC/CSO Social & Public Health Sciences Unit, University of Glasgow, 200 Renfield Street, Glasgow, G2 3AX, UK.
Michaela BenzevalInstitute for Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Colchester, CO3 3LG, UK.
MRC/CSO Social and Public Health Sciences Unit · GBUniversity of Essex · GB

Funding

Chief Scientist Office SPHSU12Chief Scientist Office SPHSU13Economic and Social Research Council ES/N00812X/1Medical Research Council MC_EX_MR/J013498/1Medical Research Council MC_EX_UU_MR/J013498/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_12017/12Medical Research Council MC_UU_12017/13Medical Research Council MR/J013498/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSmoking contributes significantly to socioeconomic health inequalities. Vaping has captured much interest as a less harmful alternative to smoking, but may be harmful relative to non-smoking. Examining inequalities in vaping by smoking status, may offer insights into potential impacts of vaping on socioeconomic inequalities in health.

methodsData were from 3291 youth (aged 10-15) and 35,367 adults (aged 16+) from wave 7 (2015-17) of the UK Household Longitudinal Study. In order to adjust for biases that could be introduced by stratifying on smoking status, marginal structural models were used to estimate controlled direct effects of an index of socioeconomic disadvantage (incorporating household education, occupation and income) on vaping by smoking status (among adults and youth), adjusting for relevant confounders and for selection into smoking states. We also estimated controlled direct effects of socioeconomic disadvantage on being an ex-smoker by vaping status (among adult ever-smokers; n = 18,128).

resultsSocioeconomic disadvantage was associated with vaping among never smoking youth (OR for a unit increase in the socioeconomic index: 1.17; 95%: 1.03-1.34), and among ex-smoking adults (OR: 1.17; 95% CI: 1.09-1.26), with little to no association among never smoking (OR: 0.98; 95% CI: 0.91-1.07) and current smoking (OR: 1.00; 95% CI: 0.93-1.07) adults. Socioeconomic disadvantage was also associated with reduced odds of being an ex-smoker among adult ever-smokers, but this association was moderately weaker among those who vaped (OR: 0.88; 95% CI: 0.82-0.95) than those who did not (OR: 0.82; 95% CI: 0.80-0.84; p-value for difference = 0.081).

conclusionsInequalities in vaping among never smoking youth and adult ex-smokers, suggest potential to widen health inequalities, while weaker inequalities in smoking cessation among adult vapers indicate e-cigarettes could help narrow inequalities. Further research is needed to understand the balance of these opposing potential impacts, and how any benefits can be maximised whilst protecting the vulnerable.

Indexed as

Health Status DisparitiesAdolescentAdultChildFemaleHumansLongitudinal StudiesMaleSmokersSmokingSocioeconomic FactorsUnited KingdomVapingYoung AdultAdultsE-cigarettesSmokingSocioeconomic positionVapingYouth

Identifiers

PMID32036787
PMCPMC7008571
OpenAlexW3003724208

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.