Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32047101›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2021

It's Just Steam: a qualitative analysis of New Zealand ENDS users' perceptions of secondhand aerosol.

Kerri Haggart, Lindsay Robertson, Mei-Ling Blank, Lucy Popova, Janet Hoek

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco control, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. An update on controversies in e-cigarettes.Paediatric respiratory reviews · 2020
    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

5 authors.

Kerri HaggartPublic Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.
Lindsay RobertsonPreventive and Social Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, Otago, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0001-8383-9116
Mei-Ling BlankPublic Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand.ORCID 0000-0003-0728-4598
Lucy PopovaSchool of Public Health, Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Janet HoekPublic Health, University of Otago, Wellington, New Zealand janet.hoek@otago.ac.nz.ORCID 0000-0003-4362-1539

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionMany smokers who begin using electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) report vaping in settings where they would not have smoked and believe secondhand aerosol (SHA) is simply steam. However, current understanding of how ENDS users differentiate between secondhand smoke and SHA, or how vaping norms develop, is limited.

methodsWe conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews with 39 current ENDS users (dual users and former smokers, now exclusive ENDS users) from New Zealand to explore participants' perceptions of SHA. We probed how these perceptions arose and examined implications for vaping practices and policy. We managed the data using NVivo V.11 and used a thematic analysis approach to interpret the transcripts.

resultsParticipants had limited understanding of SHA, its constituents or its possible effects on others. They drew on the absence of harm information, and their sensory experiences and perceptions of others' views of vaping, to support the conclusion that SHA posed few, if any, risks to bystanders. Yet despite this perception, some felt they should recognise others' rights to clean air and most would not vape around children to avoid setting an example.

conclusionsIn the absence of trusted information, participants used sensory heuristics to rationalise their ENDS practices. Policy-makers face the challenge of correcting misperceptions about SHA without deterring full transition from smoking to ENDS use. They could consider including vaping in current smoke-free area policies; this measure would signal that SHA is not harmless, and could protect clean-air settings and reduce potential normalisation of vaping among non-smokers.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsVapingAerosolsChildHumansNew ZealandPerceptionSteamAerosolsSteamelectronic nicotine delivery devicespublic policysecondhand smoke

Identifiers

PMID32047101
PMCPMC7803901

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.