ReviewToxics2022
Critical Review of the Recent Literature on Organic Byproducts in E-Cigarette Aerosol Emissions.
Review in Toxics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Health Hazards of E-Cigarettes and Heated Tobacco Products: a Comprehensive Analysis of Hazardous Substances and Regulatory Gaps.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2026Pooled it
- Review
- Development of a Flavor Ingredient Wheel Linking E-Liquid Additives to the Labeled Flavor of Vaping Products.Toxics · 2024Article
- Article
- Nicotine or marijuana vaping exposure during pregnancy and altered immune responses in offspring.Journal of environmental exposure assessment · 2024Article
- Analytical methods and experimental quality in studies targeting carbonyls in electronic cigarette aerosols.Frontiers in chemistry · 2024Review
- Review
- Physical and chemical characterizations of a reference e-cigarette used in animal testing.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Article
- Determination of chemical constituent yields in e-cigarette aerosol using partial and whole pod collections, a comparative analysis.Frontiers in chemistry · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We review the literature on laboratory studies quantifying the production of potentially toxic organic byproducts (carbonyls, carbon monoxide, free radicals and some nontargeted compounds) in e-cigarette (EC) aerosol emissions, focusing on the consistency between their experimental design and a realistic usage of the devices, as determined by the power ranges of an optimal regime fulfilling a thermodynamically efficient process of aerosol generation that avoids overheating and "dry puffs". The majority of the reviewed studies failed in various degrees to comply with this consistency criterion or supplied insufficient information to verify it. Consequently, most of the experimental outcomes and risk assessments are either partially or totally unreliable and/or of various degrees of questionable relevance to end users. Studies testing the devices under reasonable approximation to realistic conditions detected levels of all organic byproducts that are either negligible or orders of magnitude lower than in tobacco smoke. Our review reinforces the pressing need to update and improve current laboratory standards by an appropriate selection of testing parameters and the logistical incorporation of end users in the experimental design.
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.