Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33746518›Full record

ArticleTobacco use insights2021

Vape Shop Proliferation and Noncompliance in Pennsylvania: A Pre- and Post-tax Analysis.

Jason B Colditz, Megan C Tulikangas, Jaime E Sidani, Zan M Dodson, Michelle S Woods, A Everette James, Brian A Primack

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco use insights, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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

7 authors.

Jason B ColditzCenter for Research on Media, Technology, and Health, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2811-841X
Megan C TulikangasBureau of Public Policy and Community Relations, Allegheny County Health Department, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Jaime E SidaniCenter for Research on Media, Technology, and Health, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5411-8755
Zan M DodsonAmerican Association of Geographers, Washington, DC, USA.
Michelle S WoodsCenter for Research on Media, Technology, and Health, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
A Everette JamesHealth Policy Institute, University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Brian A PrimackCollege of Education and Health Professions, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville, AR, USA.

Funding

University of Pittsburgh Collaboration in Addiction Training Scholars (PittCATS) ProgramK12DA050607 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI Jane M. Liebschutz, Erin L Winstanley · 2020 to 2026
$3.2M
NIDA NIH HHS K12 DA050607
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe growing use of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) among adolescents is a public health concern. Taxation of these products is a viable approach to reduce ENDS use, particularly among adolescents. Opponents of taxation posit that it puts specialty retailers (ie, vape shops) out of business, thereby reducing availability of ENDS for adult smokers seeking harm reduction. Pennsylvania enacted substantial ENDS taxes in October 2016. This study sought to examine (1) the prevalence of Pennsylvania vape shops before and after ENDS taxes were enacted and (2) ENDS retail licensing compliance among vape shops.

methodsWe employed standardized searches for vape shops in Pennsylvania on the Yelp business-listing platform a month prior to and for 18 consecutive months following the imposition of ENDS taxes. We then compared listings to a public database of ENDS-related retail licenses to determine compliance status.

resultsThe number of listed vape shops increased in a linear fashion by a magnitude of 23%. In addition, when we compared a final listing of retailers to data from the state tax authority, we found roughly a quarter (22%-29%) of vape shops to be noncompliant with maintaining a valid ENDS retail license.

conclusionsOverall, ENDS taxation in Pennsylvania has not appeared to reduce prevalence of vape shops as anticipated. However, stricter enforcement of the tax law is necessary to ensure compliance among retailers. These findings have implications for implementation and enforcement of ENDS tax policy nationwide, including states that currently lack such policies.

Indexed as

ComplianceElectronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsPublic Health PolicyTaxation

Identifiers

PMID33746518
PMCPMC7905483

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.