ArticleTobacco prevention & cessation2022
Marketing claims on websites of brick-and-mortar vape shops in the Greater Los Angeles area.
Article in Tobacco prevention & cessation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
Abstract
introductionBrick-and-mortar vape shops have increased in recent years, but there is limited research on the types of marketing claims consumers are exposed to on their websites - a dominant channel for marketing electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS). We investigated the websites of vape shop retailers in the Greater Los Angeles Area to describe their ENDS marketing claims.
methodsData collection occurred between 25 March and 20 June 2020. Of the 104 brick-and-mortar vape shops identified, 37 were found to have active websites. Rules were established to analyze website content.
resultsSmoking cessation-related benefits were claimed most frequently (43%), followed by health-related claims (30%), and disclaimers that ENDS are not approved as smoking cessation devices (24%). More than half (56.4%) of websites had an age restriction, requiring the user to click on a box to state that they were aged ≥21 years to view the site. None required proof or outside verification of age.
conclusionsBrick-and-mortar vape shops in the Greater Los Angeles Area are marketing ENDS on their websites as a healthier alternative to smoking cigarettes. Although half of the websites had an age gate popup that consumers see when they enter the website, action is needed to better enforce age restriction on access to vape shop websites. Utility for smoking cessation was claimed most frequently, followed by the claims of healthier alternatives to smoking cigarettes, and disclaimers that ENDS are not approved as smoking cessation devices. We discuss implications for tobacco regulatory policy.
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.