ArticleBMC public health2023
Binary classification of users of electronic cigarettes and smokeless tobacco through biomarkers to assess similarity with current and former smokers: machine learning applied to the population assessment of tobacco and health study.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExposure to harmful and potentially harmful constituents in cigarette smoke is a risk factor for cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. Tobacco products that could reduce exposure to these constituents have been developed. However, the long-term effects of their use on health remain unclear. The Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study is a population-based study examining the health effects of smoking and cigarette smoking habits in the U.S. POPULATION: Participants include users of tobacco products, including electronic cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. In this study, we attempted to evaluate the population-wide effects of these products, using machine learning techniques and data from the PATH study.
methodsBiomarkers of exposure (BoE) and potential harm (BoPH) in cigarette smokers and former smokers in wave 1 of PATH were used to create binary classification machine-learning models that classified participants as either current (BoE: N = 102, BoPH: N = 428) or former smokers (BoE: N = 102, BoPH: N = 428). Data on the BoE and BoPH of users of electronic cigarettes (BoE: N = 210, BoPH: N = 258) and smokeless tobacco (BoE: N = 206, BoPH: N = 242) were input into the models to investigate whether these product users were classified as current or former smokers. The disease status of individuals classified as either current or former smokers was investigated.
resultsThe classification models for BoE and BoPH both had high model accuracy. More than 60% of participants who used either one of electronic cigarettes or smokeless tobacco were classified as former smokers in the classification model for BoE. Fewer than 15% of current smokers and dual users were classified as former smokers. A similar trend was found in the classification model for BoPH. Compared with those classified as former smokers, a higher percentage of those classified as current smokers had cardiovascular disease (9.9-10.9% vs. 6.3-6.4%) and respiratory diseases (19.4-22.2% vs. 14.2-16.7%).
conclusionsUsers of electronic cigarettes or smokeless tobacco are likely to be similar to former smokers in their biomarkers of exposure and potential harm. This suggests that using these products helps to reduce exposure to the harmful constituents of cigarettes, and they are potentially less harmful than conventional cigarettes.
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.