ArticleSubstance use & misuse2022
Geographic Differences in JUUL Use and Risk Perceptions.
Article in Substance use & misuse, 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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
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
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this study was to compare prevalence of JUUL use and JUUL risk perceptions between adolescents living in an urban area versus Appalachian areas of the U.S.
methodsData were drawn from a prospective cohort study of adolescent males (the Buckeye Teen Health Study, or BTHS); our cross-sectional analysis used data from one timepoint, collected between January and December 2019 (N = 873). Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression compared JUUL use prevalence and risk perceptions between participants in an urban Ohio county and nine predominantly rural Appalachian Ohio counties.
resultsOver a quarter of the sample (29.2%) had ever used JUUL. In the unadjusted model, prevalence of JUUL use was similar between regions but Appalachian participants perceived JUUL as more harmful (p < .001) and more addictive (p = .04) than urban participants. In the adjusted model, region was not significantly related to current JUUL use (OR: 1.20, 95% CI: 0.77, 1.87) or ever JUUL use (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 0.83, 1.60).
conclusionsJUUL use was similar between urban and Appalachian participants despite regional differences in risk perceptions. Interventions that only target risk perceptions may not be sufficient to prevent adolescent e-cigarette use, particularly in rural communities.
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.