Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32192827›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine2020

How and Why California Young Adults Are Using Different Brands of Pod-Type Electronic Cigarettes in 2019: Implications for Researchers and Regulators.

Karma McKelvey, Bonnie Halpern-Felsher

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of adolescent health : official publication of the Society for Adolescent Medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of Dependence Measures for Exclusive Electronic Cigarette Users.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. A Comprehensive Review of Vaping Use in Pediatric Patients and Recent Changes in Regulatory Laws.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Karma McKelveyDivision of Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California.
Bonnie Halpern-FelsherDivision of Adolescent Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. Electronic address: Bonnie.HalpernFelsher@Stanford.edu.
Stanford University · US

Funding

Training and Education p489-500P50CA180890 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GLANTZ, STANTON ARNOLD · 2013 to 2018
$20.5M
PROJECT 5: IMPACT OF CHANGING TOBACCO PRODUCT USE ON HEALTHCARE COSTS FOR GENERAL AND VULNERABLE POPULATIONSU54HL147127 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI LING, PAMELA MAY · 2018 to 2022
$20.4M
Novel flavored tobacco products: Adolescent perceptions and behaviorsF32DA044733 · NIDA · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI MCKELVEY, KARMA · 2018 to 2019
$129k
NCI NIH HHS P50 CA180890NHLBI NIH HHS U54 HL147127NIDA NIH HHS F32 DA044733
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe aim of the study was to describe young adult use and perceptions of different brands of pod-based electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) and compare with earlier types of non-pod-based e-cigarettes (e.g., mods and tanks).

methodsData were collected from January to March 2019 and derive from the final wave of a cohort study recruited in 2013-2014 using a convenience sample from 10 large California high schools with racially/ethnically and socioeconomically diverse populations. A total of 445 participants completed an online survey (mean age = 20.1 years [SD = 1.66], 64.8% female [n = 278], 38.8% white [n = 161], 23.9% each for Asian and "more than one race" [n = 99], 13.5% other [n = 56], and 36.9% Hispanic [n = 160]). The main outcomes were description of and reasons to use pods, perceived nicotine content, and use patterns.

resultsAlthough <25% of participants reported smoking cigarettes and using non-pod-based e-cigarettes, >25% reported ever use of JUUL. Similarly, <33% of cigarette smokers and non-pod-based e-cigarette users reported use in the past 30 days, and >50% of JUUL ever users did. The most agreed upon reason (58%) for using pods was because they are "easy to hide." About half of pod users "do not know" if they mix brands of e-juice and pods, the nicotine concentration in their e-juice cartridges, nor time to finish a cartridge. Of the 50% of participants who shared their pod, 23 (15%) did "sometimes," 20 (13%) "always," and 16 (11% each) "about half the time" or "often." There was no consensus about how to refer to different brands of pods.

conclusionsOur findings indicate young adults harbor confusion about pod-based e-cigarettes, including nicotine content, usage patterns, and labeling, and that pod use is largely because of the ease with which they can "stealth" vape. The findings suggest needed regulation and education about these products.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsTobacco ProductsVapingAdultCaliforniaCohort StudiesFemaleHumansMaleYoung AdultE-cigarettesFlavorsPerceptionsPod-based e-cigarettesUse

Identifiers

PMID32192827
PMCPMC7311231
OpenAlexW3010850705

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.