ArticleTobacco induced diseases2023
Cigarette, e-cigarette and waterpipe cognitions and use among university students in Guangzhou, China.
Article in Tobacco induced diseases, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Differences in AUTOS- and FTND-assessed dependence on various tobacco products among Chinese current tobacco/nicotine users.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Attractiveness and determinants of different tobacco products among Chinese smokers and non-smokers: a web-based cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- The hidden threat of tobacco use among Chinese adolescents.Tobacco induced diseases · 2025Article
- Electronic cigarette use and consumption patterns in medical university students.Frontiers in public health · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThere is currently little research on polytobacco use in China. The present study examined cognitions that predicted the use of cigarettes, e-cigarettes and waterpipes in a Chinese sample of students.
methodsA convenience sample of 281 university students, obtained using snowball sampling, completed an online survey during the 2019-2020 academic year in Guangzhou, China.
resultsMen more strongly agreed, than women, with the possible advantages of using alternative nicotine and tobacco products, including: young people who smoke have more friends, smoking makes young people look cool, smoking makes young people feel more comfortable, smoking helps relieve stress, and it would be easy to quit. Factors significantly associated with regular cigarette use were the cognitions: 'I would smoke if my best friend offered', 'Young people who use these products have more friends', and 'It would be easy to quit these products' (global good classifications= 80.1%). In the case of waterpipes, agreement with the cognition: 'The product helps people relieve stress' was significantly associated with its use (global good classifications=80.1%). In the case of e-cigarettes, agreement with the cognitions: 'I would smoke if my best friend offered' and 'It would be easy to quit using these products' were significantly associated with the use of e-cigarettes (global good classifications=74.7%).
conclusionsThe results highlight the need to develop prevention programs that prepare young Chinese people to resist social pressure from friends to use tobacco products. There is also evidence of the need to facilitate and disseminate rigorous scientific information among young people about the possible negative health effects of alternative tobacco products. There were also gender differences in the use of these products and in the cognitions towards their use, so it is important to take the gender perspective into account in the analysis of the results and when writing future questionnaire items.
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.