Observational studyJMIR public health and surveillance2021
Electronic Cigarette Users' Perspective on the COVID-19 Pandemic: Observational Study Using Twitter Data.
Observational study in JMIR public health and surveillance, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Spatiotemporal analysis of electronic cigarette discussion on Twitter/X using natural language processing.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Exploring Social Media Discourse on Cigars: Insights from Twitter/X Data.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026Article
- Spatiotemporal Analysis of Electronic Cigarette Perception on Twitter/X Using Natural Language Processing.Research square · 2026Article
- Social media crisis communication and public engagement during COVID-19 analyzing public health and news media organizations' tweeting strategies.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Social Network Ties and Responses to COVID-19 Among E-Cigarette Users.Journal of drug issues · 2023Article
- Perceptions of Oral Nicotine Pouches on Reddit: Observational Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2022Observational
- Investigating the Impact of the New York State Flavor Ban on e-Cigarette-Related Discussions on Twitter: Observational Study.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2022Observational
- Discussions and Misinformation About Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems and COVID-19: Qualitative Analysis of Twitter Content.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Use of electronic cigarettes and heated tobacco products during the Covid-19 pandemic.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The COVID-19 Pandemic and Mental Health Concerns on Twitter in the United States.Health data science · 2022Article
- A high-resolution temporal and geospatial content analysis of Twitter posts related to the COVID-19 pandemic.Journal of computational social science · 2022Article
- Vaping and COVID-19 Risk: Perceived link and its correlates among at-risk adolescents.Preventive medicine reports · 2021Article
- Vaping and COVID-19: Insights for Public Health and Clinical Care from Twitter.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Vaping discussion in the COVID-19 pandemic: An observational study using Twitter data.PloS one · 2021Article
- Unmasking the Twitter Discourses on Masks During the COVID-19 Pandemic: User Cluster-Based BERT Topic Modeling Approach.JMIR infodemiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPrevious studies have shown that electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) users might be more vulnerable to COVID-19 infection and could develop more severe symptoms if they contract the disease owing to their impaired immune responses to viral infections. Social media platforms such as Twitter have been widely used by individuals worldwide to express their responses to the current COVID-19 pandemic.
objectiveIn this study, we aimed to examine the longitudinal changes in the attitudes of Twitter users who used e-cigarettes toward the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as compare differences in attitudes between e-cigarette users and nonusers based on Twitter data.
methodsThe study dataset containing COVID-19-related Twitter posts (tweets) posted between March 5 and April 3, 2020, was collected using a Twitter streaming application programming interface with COVID-19-related keywords. Twitter users were classified into two groups: Ecig group, including users who did not have commercial accounts but posted e-cigarette-related tweets between May 2019 and August 2019, and non-Ecig group, including users who did not post any e-cigarette-related tweets. Sentiment analysis was performed to compare sentiment scores towards the COVID-19 pandemic between both groups and determine whether the sentiment expressed was positive, negative, or neutral. Topic modeling was performed to compare the main topics discussed between the groups.
resultsThe US COVID-19 dataset consisted of 4,500,248 COVID-19-related tweets collected from 187,399 unique Twitter users in the Ecig group and 11,479,773 COVID-19-related tweets collected from 2,511,659 unique Twitter users in the non-Ecig group. Sentiment analysis showed that Ecig group users had more negative sentiment scores than non-Ecig group users. Results from topic modeling indicated that Ecig group users had more concerns about deaths due to COVID-19, whereas non-Ecig group users cared more about the government's responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.
conclusionsOur findings show that Twitter users who tweeted about e-cigarettes had more concerns about the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings can inform public health practitioners to use social media platforms such as Twitter for timely monitoring of public responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and educating and encouraging current e-cigarette users to quit vaping to minimize the risks associated with COVID-19.
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.