Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33849549›Full record

ArticleHarm reduction journal2021

'I perceive it to be less harmful, I have no idea if it is or not:' a qualitative exploration of the harm perceptions of IQOS among adult users.

Katherine A East, Charlotte N E Tompkins, Ann McNeill, Sara C Hitchman

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Harm reduction journal, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Health Hazards of E-Cigarettes and Heated Tobacco Products: a Comprehensive Analysis of Hazardous Substances and Regulatory Gaps.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Risk perception ofSSM - population health · 2022
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Katherine A EastNational Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK. katherine.east@kcl.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0001-9083-2131
Charlotte N E TompkinsNational Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Ann McNeillNational Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
Sara C HitchmanNational Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK.
King's College London · GBUniversity of Waterloo · CA

Funding

Vaporized Nicotine Product Initiation Among Youth in the US, Canada, and England: Methods to Predict Uptake and Policy EfficacyP01CA200512 · NCI · MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA · PI FONG, GEOFFREY T · 2016 to 2025
$25.3M
Cancer Research UK C51836/A25751NCI NIH HHS P01 CA200512
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHarm perceptions of tobacco and nicotine products can influence their use and could be targeted by policies to change behaviour. IQOS was introduced to the UK in 2016, and there is little independent qualitative research on IQOS harm perceptions. This study explored the perceived health harms of IQOS to users and those exposed to the emissions, what shapes these perceptions, and what participants wanted to know about the harms of IQOS.

methodsQualitative interviews in London, UK, with 30 adult current and former IQOS users who currently smoked or quit smoking in the last 2 years.

resultsIQOS was perceived as less harmful than smoking but not risk-free, although there was great uncertainty. Influences on harm perceptions were consolidated into six themes: (1) dominance of manufacturer claims influenced perceptions that IQOS is less harmful than smoking to users and those around them, although mistrust of the tobacco industry heightened scepticism about harms; (2) limited independent and long-term research led to uncertainty about harms, although some participants trusted IQOS would not be marketed if it were very harmful. Participants wanted more independent and long-term studies into harm; (3) appearance of HEETS (tobacco sticks) packaging conveyed reduced harm because packets were 'pretty', without graphic/specific warnings, although written warnings conveyed some harm. Participants wanted more information on HEETS packets about harms; (4) process of heating and HEETS contents-heating, compared with burning, tobacco was perceived to produce fewer harmful chemicals, while tobacco, nicotine, and chemicals in HEETS were perceived to cause some harm. Participants wanted clarification about the harms of heating tobacco and HEETS ingredients; (5) improvements in physical health and personal appearance reduced perceptions of harm; (6) differences in sensory experiences (taste, sight, smell) when using IQOS over smoking reduced perceptions of harm, while 'black' deposits inside IQOS led to perceptions of some harm. Reduced volume and smell of IQOS emissions also reduced perceptions of harm to non-users exposed to the emissions.

conclusionsIQOS was perceived as less harmful than smoking but not risk-free, although there was great uncertainty. Participants wanted clarification about IQOS harms from independent sources in accessible forms, specifically related to HEETS ingredients, heating tobacco, and emissions to others.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsTobacco ProductsAdultHumansPerceptionTobacco SmokingTobacco UseHarm perceptionsNicotineQualitative researchTobacco

Identifiers

PMID33849549
PMCPMC8045216
OpenAlexW3153716297

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.