Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36328459›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2022

Electronic cigarette users' reactions and responses to a hypothetical ban of flavoured electronic cigarette liquids.

Eric K Soule, Shannon Mayne, William Snipes, Luke Thomas, Mignonne C Guy, Alison Breland, Pebbles Fagan

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco control, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Reactions to a Hypothetical Ban of Open-System Electronic Cigarettes Among People Who Currently Use Electronic Cigarettes.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Eric K SouleDepartment of Health Education and Promotion, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA soulee18@ecu.edu.ORCID 0000-0003-2740-5633
Shannon MayneDepartment of Health Education and Promotion, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA.
William SnipesDepartment of Health Education and Promotion, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA.
Luke ThomasDepartment of Health Education and Promotion, East Carolina University, Greenville, North Carolina, USA.
Mignonne C GuyCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
Alison BrelandCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-8949-2395
Pebbles FaganCenter for the Study of Tobacco Products, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
Virginia Commonwealth University · US

Funding

The Center for Research, Health, and Social JusticeP50MD017319 · NIMHD · UNIV OF ARKANSAS FOR MED SCIS · PI FAGAN, PEBBLES · 2021 to 2025
$21.9M
Project 4: Using a prospective cohort survey to test population-level predictions generated by Projects 1-3U54DA036105 · NIDA · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI BRELAND, ALISON · 2018 to 2022
$20.8M
Electronic cigarette use inside of vehicles and associated secondhand and thirdhand exposuresR15ES032138 · NIEHS · EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY · PI SOULE, ERIC KENDALL · 2020 to 2020
$440k
SmartVape: Real-time assessment of ECIG device characteristics using a smartphone app.R21CA239188 · NCI · VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY · PI EISSENBERG, THOMAS EVAN, FUEMMELER, BERNARD F · 2019 to 2020
$434k
NCI NIH HHS R21 CA239188NIDA NIH HHS U54 DA036105NIEHS NIH HHS R15 ES032138NIMHD NIH HHS P50 MD017319
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BackgroundRegulations have been proposed to limit e-cigarette flavours, but limited research has examined potential impacts of such policies. This study examined adult e-cigarette users' reactions to a hypothetical e-cigarette flavour ban.

methodsIn 2019, a convenience sample of current e-cigarette users in the USA (n=81, 53.1% women, mean age=37.6, 59.3% dual users of cigarettes) completed an online concept mapping study. Participants provided statements describing anticipated reactions to a hypothetical policy in which only tobacco, menthol or unflavoured e-cigarettes were available for purchase. Seventy-one unique statements were generated. Participants sorted statements into thematic groups and rated statements on how likely they would be to have each reaction. Multidimensional scaling was used to identify thematic clusters of statements.

resultsTwelve clusters were identified: negative reaction, take action against flavour limitation, youth prevention effectiveness perception, tolerance, acceptance, willingness to try new flavours, maintain vaping, reduce vaping, new flavours as vaping cessation transition, alternative sources for banned flavours, do-it-yourself mixing behaviours and alternative tobacco products. The highest rated cluster (negative reaction) described being angry or upset that flavours were banned, while the lowest rated clusters related to quitting/reducing e-cigarette use or switching to other tobacco products. Non-tobacco or non-menthol/mint flavoured e-cigarette users had higher ratings for clusters describing negative sentiment for the hypothetical policy.

conclusionsSome e-cigarette users may dislike an e-cigarette flavour ban; however, some e-cigarette users would likely be willing to use tobacco, menthol or unflavoured e-cigarette liquids with lower likelihood of quitting vaping or switching to other tobacco products.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsTobacco ProductsVapingAdolescentAdultFemaleFlavoring AgentsHumansMaleMentholSmokersFlavoring AgentsMentholElectronic nicotine delivery devicesNon-cigarette tobacco productsPublic policy

Identifiers

PMID36328459
PMCPMC9661374
OpenAlexW4308639090

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.