Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37239490›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2023

Promotion of E-Cigarettes on TikTok and Regulatory Considerations.

Jonine Jancey, Tama Leaver, Katharina Wolf, Becky Freeman, Kevin Chai, Stella Bialous, Marilyn Bromberg, Phoebe Adams, Meghan Mcleod, Renee N Carey and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. #Discreetshipping: Selling E-cigarettes on TikTok.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. [Tabacco harm reduction: the need for a paradigm shift in German tobacco control policy].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2024
    Review
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

11 authors.

Jonine JanceyCollaboration for Evidence, Research and Impact in Public Health, School of Population Health, Curtin University, Kent Street, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7894-2896
Tama LeaverInternet Studies, School of Media, Creative Arts and Social Inquiry, Curtin University, Kent Street, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-4065-4725
Katharina WolfSchool of Marketing, Curtin University, Kent Street, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6740-4478
Becky FreemanSchool of Public Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-2082-9612
Kevin ChaiSchool of Population Health, Curtin University, Kent Street, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
Stella BialousSchool of Nursing, University of California, San Francisco, CA 94158, USA.
Marilyn BrombergUWA Law School, The University of Western Australia, 35 Stirling Highway, Perth, WA 6009, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-9827-3095
Phoebe AdamsCollaboration for Evidence, Research and Impact in Public Health, School of Population Health, Curtin University, Kent Street, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
Meghan McleodCollaboration for Evidence, Research and Impact in Public Health, School of Population Health, Curtin University, Kent Street, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
Renee N CareySchool of Population Health, Curtin University, Kent Street, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-0152-5971
Kahlia McCauslandCollaboration for Evidence, Research and Impact in Public Health, School of Population Health, Curtin University, Kent Street, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-7071-6491

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

E-cigarettes are promoted extensively on TikTok and other social media platforms. Platform policies to restrict e-cigarette promotion seem insufficient and are poorly enforced. This paper aims to understand how e-cigarettes are being promoted on TikTok and provide insights into the effectiveness of current TikTok policies. Seven popular hashtag-based keywords were used to identify TikTok accounts and associated videos related to e-cigarettes. Posts were independently coded by two trained coders. Collectively, the 264 videos received 2,470,373 views, 166,462 likes and 3426 comments. The overwhelming majority of videos (97.7%) portrayed e-cigarettes positively, and these posts received 98.7% of the total views and 98.2% of the total likes. A total of 69 posts (26.1%) clearly violated TikTok's own content policy. The findings of the current study suggest that a variety of predominantly pro-vaping content is available on TikTok. Current policies and moderation processes appear to be insufficient in restricting the spread of pro-e-cigarette content on TikTok, putting predominantly young users at potential risk of e-cigarette use.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsSocial MediaEmotionsHumansPolicye-cigarettespublic healthsocial mediaTikTokvapingyoung adults

Identifiers

PMID37239490
PMCPMC10217796

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.