ArticleSubstance use & misuse2022
Validation of the Electronic Cigarette Expectancy Scale for Adolescents.
Article in Substance use & misuse, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Measurement invariance in the Youth Electronic Cigarette Outcome Expectancies Questionnaire across sex and race/ethnicity in pre- to early adolescence.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026Article
- Study protocol for the Breathe Easy All Together e-cigarette prevention program: a RE-AIM framework-based experimental process and impact evaluation.BMC public health · 2026Article
- E-cigarette Attitude and Belief Scale in Adolescents: A Validity and Reliability Study.Thoracic research and practice · 2025Article
- Adolescent E-Cigarette Expectancies: Measure Development and Preliminary Validity of the Electronic Nicotine Vaping Outcomes Measure for Youth.Tobacco use insights · 2024Article
- Study protocol of the Our Futures Vaping Trial: a cluster randomised controlled trial of a school-based eHealth intervention to prevent e-cigarette use among adolescents.BMC public health · 2023Article
- Predicting Adolescent Electronic Cigarette Use: Differences by Never, Ever, and Current Users.Journal of pediatric psychology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionExpectancies of costs and benefits can be predictive of tobacco use, as well as cessation attempts and success. Measuring electronic cigarette (ECIG) expectancies is in its infancy, particularly among adolescents. However, the popularity of adolescent ECIG use demonstrates the need to understand better these contributing factors. Our aim was to evaluate the factor structure and initial psychometric properties of an ECIG expectancies questionnaire adapted from an existing validated scale for conventional cigarette smoking (
methodsFive-hundred sixty-nine adolescents (14-18 years; 60.1% female; 84.1% White) were recruited from high schools and an adolescent medicine clinic. Participants completed a battery of self-report measures, including the
resultsA three-factor solution was chosen based on statistical evidence and conceptual relevance. All three factors - Costs, Social Benefits, and Affective/Weight Benefits - had strong internal consistencies and demonstrated convergent validity via significant associations with peer ECIG use and Conscientiousness. The Costs and Affective/Weight Benefits factors also demonstrated convergent validity with sensation-seeking, intention to use ECIGs, and ECIG use status (current, lifetime, nonuser).
conclusionResults support the initial reliability and validity of the EESA scores. This factor structure is related to, yet different from, that observed not only for the SESA but also for other ECIG-expectancy measures among adult populations.
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.