ArticleFrontiers in chemistry2023
Determination of chemical constituent yields in e-cigarette aerosol using partial and whole pod collections, a comparative analysis.
Article in Frontiers in chemistry, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Physical and Chemical Characterization of Aerosols Produced from Commercial Nicotine Salt-Based E-Liquids.Chemical research in toxicology · 2025Article
- Exposure to secondhand smoke from cigarettes and secondhand aerosol from tobacco and nicotine products in indoor and outdoor public spaces in the European Union: a cross-sectional study.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Harmful and Potentially Harmful Constituents in E-Liquids and Aerosols from Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems (ENDS).Chemical research in toxicology · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Literature reports the chemical constituent yields of electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) aerosol collected using a range of aerosol collection strategies. The number of puffs to deplete an ENDS product varies widely, but collections often consist of data from the first 50-100 puffs. However, it is not clear whether these discrete puff blocks are representative of constituent yields over the life of a pod. We aimed to assess the effect of differing aerosol collection strategies on reported yields for select chemical constituents in the aerosol of closed pod-based ENDS products. Constituents analyzed were chosen to reflect important classes of compounds from the Final Premarket Tobacco Product Application Guidance. Yields were normalized to total device mass loss (DML). Collection strategies that consisted of partial pod collection were valid for determining yields of constituents whose DML normalized yields were consistent for the duration of pod life. These included primary aerosol constituents, such as propylene glycol, glycerol, and nicotine, and whole pod yields could be determined from initial puff blocks. However, changes were observed in the yields of some metals, some carbonyl compounds, and glycidol over pod life in a chemical constituent and product dependent manner. These results suggest that collection strategies consisting of initial puff block collections require validation per chemical constituent/product and are not appropriate for chemical constituents with variable yields over pod life. Whole pod collection increased sensitivity and accuracy in determining metal, carbonyl, and glycidol yields compared to puff block-based collection methodologies for all products tested.
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.