Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32612402›Full record

ArticleTobacco use insights2020

A Qualitative Exploration of Consumers' Perceived Impacts, Behavioural Reactions, and Future Reflections of the EU Tobacco Products Directive (2017) as Applied to Electronic Cigarettes.

Emma Ward, Claudia Anholt, Sarah Gentry, Lynne Dawkins, Richard Holland, Caitlin Notley

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco use insights, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 24% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. E-cigarette Use in Prisons With Recently Established Smokefree Policies: A Qualitative Interview Study With People in Custody in Scotland.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2021
    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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Emma WardNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7579-3215
Claudia AnholtNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Sarah GentryNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Lynne DawkinsCentre for Addictive Behaviours Research, School of Applied Sciences, London South Bank University, London, UK.
Richard HollandLeicester Medical School, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Caitlin NotleyNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
University of East Anglia · GBLondon South Bank University · GBUniversity of Leicester · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 22732
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundElectronic cigarette regulations included in the Tobacco Products Directive (TPD), Article 20, implemented in Europe by May 2017, aimed to improve safety for e-cigarette consumers, and prevent uptake among non-smokers, particularly young people. Before implementation, there were significant concerns from consumers, industry, and some in the scientific community about the potential negative impact of the TPD on people using e-cigarettes to remain abstinent from smoking. To date, there is limited evidence on how the TPD has affected consumers. This study aimed to add insight into how consumers perceived and experienced the regulations.

methodsQualitative data, collected between March 2018 and March 2019, relating to participant views of the TPD were extracted from 160 interviews/extended surveys of e-cigarette consumers as part of a wider study into e-cigarette use trajectories (ECtra study). Data were thematically analysed.

resultsAwareness of the TPD among consumers was not universal. Participants' smoking behaviour did not appear to be influenced by the legislation. Participants were reassured by manufacturing regulations and requirements for ingredients labels. Participants responded negatively to changes perceived to cause inconvenience and extra plastic waste. The product restrictions prompted some participants to purchase non-compliant products illegally, potentially putting their safety at risk.

conclusionsE-cigarette regulation should focus on ensuring product safety. Raising awareness of the TPD among consumers and smokers could be beneficial.

Indexed as

consumer viewsElectronic cigarettesENDSnicotinequalitative researchtobacco policyTobacco Products Directivetobacco regulationvaping

Identifiers

PMID32612402
PMCPMC7307283
OpenAlexW3020741730

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.