Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35049244›Full record

ArticleMedicine2021

Intention to quit smoking according to smoking preferences and perceptions of electronic cigarettes among university students in South Korea.

Ryoung Choi, Hyun Goo Kang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Ryoung ChoiDepartment of Health Administration, Dongshin University, Naju, South Korea.
Hyun Goo KangDepartment of Neurology, Jeonbuk National University School of Medicine, Jeonju, South Korea.ORCID 0000-0001-5443-3635

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

abstractThis study aimed to alleviate unhealthy smoking habits among university students and provide the basic data necessary for public health-oriented approaches such as developing regulations and policies on electronic cigarettes by analyzing the relationship between university students' smoking preferences, perceptions of electronic cigarettes, and intention to quit smoking.This study involved 567 college students and conducted frequency and chi-squared analyses of the general characteristics, smoking preferences, and perceptions of electronic cigarettes. This study also performed logistic regression analysis to analyze the relationship between intention to quit smoking stratified by smoking preferences and the perceptions about electronic cigarettes. SPSS version 25.0 was used for data analysis.This study showed that electronic cigarette smokers were approximately 6.4 to 10.8 times more likely to think that electronic cigarettes positively affect smoking cessation attitude than nonsmokers. This study showed that regular cigarette smokers were approximately 1.7 to 2.2 times and other smoker 3.3 to 3.9 times more likely to think that electronic cigarettes positively affect smoking cessation attitude than nonsmokers. Those who perceived harmless to the human body, capable of reducing the frequency of smoking, and less harmful than tobacco were approximately 2.6 to 2.9, 11.6 to 12.8, and 3.3 to 3.7 times more likely have intention to quit smoking, respectively.Regular health education, advertising awareness of health hazards, and public health science-oriented approaches and policies for smoking cessation support services are needed to create awareness on electronic cigarettes among university students.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsIntentionAdultFemaleHumansMaleRepublic of KoreaSmokingSmoking CessationStudentsUniversities

Identifiers

PMID35049244
PMCPMC9191613

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.