ArticleDigital health
Effects of brief exposure to misinformation about e-cigarette harms on Twitter on knowledge and perceptions of e-cigarettes.
Article in Digital health. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to change vaping harm perceptions and associations between harm perceptions and vaping and smoking behaviours: A systematic review.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2026Pooled it
- An Exploratory Typology of Tobacco-Related Misleading Content on Social Media: Qualitative Analysis of Instagram and TikTok.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- 'E-cigarette smoking' is a misleading term: a critical review of its use in academic literature.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Review
- Community knowledge of Australia's national preventive health strategy focus areas: a nationally representative survey of 1509 adults.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Vaping Under the Microscope: Unpacking Iranian Dentists' Insights on Electronic Cigarettes and Their Impact on Oral Health.Addiction & health · 2025Article
- Media health literacy predicts preventive health behaviors: findings from a nationally matched survey.Frontiers in digital health · 2025Article
- Content Analysis of YouTube Videos Related to E-Cigarettes and COVID-19.Substance use & misuse · 2024Article
- Cancer misinformation on social media.CA: a cancer journal for cliniciansReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background: This study examined whether exposure to misinformation found on Twitter about e-cigarette harms leads to inaccurate knowledge and misperceptions of harms of e-cigarette use among cigarette smokers. Methods: We conducted an online randomized controlled experiment in November 2019 among an online sample of 2400 adult US and UK cigarette smokers who did not currently use e-cigarettes. Participants viewed four tweets in one of four conditions: 1) e-cigarettes are as or more harmful than smoking, 2) e-cigarettes are completely harmless, 3) e-cigarette harms are uncertain and 4) control (physical activity). Outcomes were knowledge about e-cigarettes and harm perceptions of e-cigarette use for five diseases. We conducted multiple logistic and linear regressions to analyze the effect of experimental conditions on outcomes, controlling for baseline knowledge and perceived harms. Findings: Participants in the 'as or more harmful' condition (vs. control group) had higher odds of accurate knowledge about e-cigarettes containing toxic chemicals ( Interpretation: Brief exposure to misinformation on Twitter reduced accurate knowledge of the presence of tar and the level of toxins compared with smoking and increased harm perceptions of e-cigarette use.
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.