ArticlePediatric quality & safety
Vaping: Impact of Improving Screening Questioning in Adolescent Population: A Quality Improvement Initiative.
Article in Pediatric quality & safety. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- How primary care addresses vaping in the youth: a systematic literature review.BMC primary care · 2026Pooled it
- What Strategies Do Healthcare Providers Use to Promote Adolescents' Vaping Cessation? A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Beyond Tobacco: Bridging Gaps in Social History Records for Tobacco-Free Nicotine Pouch Consumers.OTO openArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The use of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS) increased dramatically over the past decade, making them the most common tobacco product used among youth. While physicians often screen for the use of tobacco, very few screen for vaping product usage. This quality improvement project aimed to increase the screening rate of ENDS use among adolescents to 85% to match the Healthy People 2020 screening target of 83.3% for smoking.
methodWe collected data from weekly chart reviews of all adolescent visits with a primary care provider by using keywords such as "vapor," "e-cigs," and "vaping" to document screening for ENDS use. The project consisted of 4 PDSA cycles: (1) education of the Adolescent Clinic staff about screening; (2) the addition of the specific question for e-cigarette use in the facility's Electronic Health Record; (3) house staff lecture about the importance of screening; and (4) reinforcement about screening to adolescent physicians.
resultsThe percentage of screening for traditional tobacco use was consistently higher than ENDS use in all months. ENDS use assessment increased since the first intervention, going from 0% at baseline to 90% at the end. The addition of a specific question for ENDS use in EPIC was the most significant intervention and increased the screening percentage to 78%.
conclusionsTo adequately assess for the use of ENDS, the nonspecific question, "do you smoke?" is not sufficient. A direct approach is necessary. A specific question in the EHR is the most significant way to increase screening for ENDS use.
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.