ArticleAddictive behaviors2023
Device and liquid characteristics used with sweet, menthol/mint, and tobacco ENDS liquid flavors: The population-based VAPER study.
Article in Addictive behaviors, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of sweet/fruit-flavored disposable electronic cigarettes on early nicotine initiation - a systematic review.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
- Decisions of the FDA on premarket tobacco product applications: Changes in the number of unique devices and liquids used by US adults who frequently use electronic nicotine delivery systems, 2020-2023.Tobacco induced diseases · 2024Article
- Zebrafish (International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Transitions in device and liquid characteristic groupings among US adults frequently using electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) over three timepoints, 2020-2021.Tobacco induced diseases · 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
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionElectronic nicotine delivery system (ENDS) device and liquid characteristics (e.g., wattage, nicotine concentration) are diverse and important in determining product appeal, aerosol volume/nicotine levels, and toxicity. Little is known about how device and liquid characteristics vary by flavor; we address this gap to identify potential regulatory implications.
methodsData are from a longitudinal cohort study (Waves 2 and 3; December 2020-December 2021) of adult (≥21 years) U.S. ENDS users (≥5 days of use/week). Participants (n = 1809) reported on and submitted photos of their most used device and liquid. Participants were categorized into flavor groups of high prevalence in our sample and in prior literature: sweet, menthol/mint, or tobacco. Participants using liquids without nicotine or flavors other than sweet, menthol/mint, or tobacco were excluded (n = 320). Data were analyzed cross-sectionally. Chi-square and linear regression (n = 1489) were used to examine device and liquid characteristics by flavor.
resultsSweet flavors were most common (n = 1135; 76.2%), followed by menthol/mint (n = 214, 14.4%) and tobacco (n = 140, 9.4%). Sweet flavors were less common among participants using reusable devices with disposable pods/cartridges (nicotine salt) than those using other device-liquid groupings (5.2% vs 86.5-93.9%; p < 0.001). Sweet flavors were less common among those using ENDS for non-flavor reasons vs the flavor (73.5% vs 90.4%; p < 0.001). Sweet flavors correlated with lower nicotine concentrations, higher wattages, and lower ages of ENDS first use (p < 0.001).
conclusionsRegulatory agencies must consider how regulations on device and liquid characteristics may affect ENDS users' behaviors (e.g., limiting availability of sweet flavors may encourage use of non-sweet flavors and lower wattages).
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.