ArticleJournal of occupational and environmental medicine2021
Vaping in the Workplace: Prevalence and Attitudes Among Employed US Adults.
Article in Journal of occupational and environmental medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- E-cigarette aerosol exposure modulates crystalline silica-induced fibrotic responses in the lungs.Archives of toxicology · 2026Article
- Influence of puff topographies on e-liquid heating temperature, emission characteristics and modeled lung deposition of Puff BarAerosol science and technology : the journal of the American Association for Aerosol Research · 2023Article
- Effect of Puffing Behavior on Particle Size Distributions and Respiratory Depositions From Pod-Style Electronic Cigarette, or Vaping, Products.Frontiers in public health · 2021Article
- Vaping in the Workplace: Implications for Employer-Sponsored Tobacco Cessation Programs.Journal of occupational and environmental medicine · 2020Article
- A review of popular vaping misconceptions: redefining ENDS safety and usage risks.Inhalation toxicologyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveDescribe workplace vaping, prevalence of observed use, attitudes, and perceptions among US adults.
methodsEmployees of companies with more than 150 employees, drawn from an opt-in national online panel (N = 1607), ages 18 to 65, completed an online survey in November 2019.
resultsMajority (61.6%) observed coworkers vaping at work and 19.1% reported vaping at work themselves. Participants perceived workplace vaping as moderately harmful (M = 1.9 out of 3), 63.2% were bothered by workplace vaping and 52.1% thought it decreased workplace productivity among non-users. Multiple regression models found workplace vaping prevalence varied by industry and participant characteristics, and attitudes about it varied by tobacco use status.
conclusionsWorkplace vaping and vaping exposure is common in US workplaces. Employees, particularly non-users, hold generally negative perceptions of workplace vaping. Comprehensive policies to prevent workplace vaping are needed to protect workers.
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.