Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37921768›Full record

ArticleJAMA network open2023

E-Cigarette Use Among US Adults in the 2021 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Survey.

John Erhabor, Ellen Boakye, Olufunmilayo Obisesan, Albert D Osei, Erfan Tasdighi, Hassan Mirbolouk, Andrew P DeFilippis, Andrew C Stokes, Glenn A Hirsch, Emelia J Benjamin and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JAMA network open, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

62 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The geographic distribution and community correlates of electronic cigarette use in Canada.Canadian journal of public health = Revue canadienne de sante publique · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

2 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

15 authors.

John ErhaborJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Baltimore, Maryland.
Ellen BoakyeJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Baltimore, Maryland.
Olufunmilayo ObisesanDepartment of Medicine, MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.
Albert D OseiDepartment of Medicine, MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, Maryland.
Erfan TasdighiJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Baltimore, Maryland.
Hassan MirboloukDepartment of Internal Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Andrew P DeFilippisAmerican Heart Association Tobacco Regulation and Addiction Center, Dallas, Texas.
Andrew C StokesAmerican Heart Association Tobacco Regulation and Addiction Center, Dallas, Texas.
Glenn A HirschAmerican Heart Association Tobacco Regulation and Addiction Center, Dallas, Texas.
Emelia J BenjaminAmerican Heart Association Tobacco Regulation and Addiction Center, Dallas, Texas.
Carlos J RodriguezAmerican Heart Association Tobacco Regulation and Addiction Center, Dallas, Texas.
Omar El ShahawyAmerican Heart Association Tobacco Regulation and Addiction Center, Dallas, Texas.
Rose Marie RobertsonAmerican Heart Association Tobacco Regulation and Addiction Center, Dallas, Texas.
Aruni BhatnagarAmerican Heart Association Tobacco Regulation and Addiction Center, Dallas, Texas.
Michael J BlahaJohns Hopkins Ciccarone Center for Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease, Baltimore, Maryland.

Funding

PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF MYOCARDIAL DISEASEST32HL007227 · NHLBI · JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY · PI Chulan Kwon, WENDY S POST · 1985 to 2026
$21.2M
Novel Methods for Evaluating the Association of Electronic Cigarette Use with Cardiovascular HealthK01HL154130 · NHLBI · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI STOKES, ANDREW · 2020 to 2024
$904k
NHLBI NIH HHS K01 HL154130NHLBI NIH HHS T32 HL007227
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: After the initial disruption from the COVID-19 pandemic, it is unclear how patterns of e-cigarette use in the US have changed. Objective: To examine recent patterns in current and daily e-cigarette use among US adults in 2021. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from the 2021 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) database. The BRFSS is the largest national telephone-based survey of randomly sampled adults in the US. Adults aged 18 years or older, residing in 49 US states (all except Florida), the District of Columbia, and 3 US territories (Guam, Puerto Rico, and the US Virgin Islands), were included in the data set. Data analysis was performed in January 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The main outcome was age-adjusted prevalence of current and daily e-cigarette use overall and by participant characteristics, state, and territory. Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted, applying weights to account for population representation. Results: This study included 414 755 BRFSS participants with information on e-cigarette use. More than half of participants were women (51.3%). In terms of race and ethnicity, 0.9% of participants were American Indian or Alaska Native, 5.8% were Asian, 11.5% were Black, 17.3% were Hispanic, 0.2% were Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, 62.2% were White, 1.4% were of multiple races or ethnicities, and 0.6% were of other race or ethnicity. Individuals aged 18 to 24 years comprised 12.4% of the study population. The age-standardized prevalence of current e-cigarette use was 6.9% (95% CI, 6.7%-7.1%), with almost half of participants using e-cigarettes daily (3.2% [95% CI, 3.1%-3.4%]). Among individuals aged 18 to 24 years, there was a consistently higher prevalence of e-cigarette use, with more than 18.6% reporting current use and more than 9.0% reporting daily use. Overall, among individuals reporting current e-cigarette use, 42.2% (95% CI, 40.7%-43.7%) indicated former combustible cigarette use, 37.1% (95% CI, 35.6%-38.6%) indicated current combustible cigarette use, and 20.7% (95% CI, 19.7%-21.8%) indicated never using combustible cigarettes. Although relatively older adults (aged ≥25 years) who reported current e-cigarette use were more likely to report former or current combustible cigarette use, younger adults (aged 18-24 years) were more likely to report never using combustible cigarettes. Notably, the proportion of individuals who reported current e-cigarette use and never using combustible cigarettes was higher in the group aged 18 to 20 years (71.5% [95% CI, 66.8%-75.7%]) compared with those aged 21 to 24 years (53.0% [95% CI, 49.8%-56.1%]). Conclusion and Relevance: These findings suggest that e-cigarette use remained common during the COVID-19 pandemic, particularly among young adults aged 18 to 24 years (18.3% prevalence). Notably, 71.5% of individuals aged 18 to 20 years who reported current e-cigarette use had never used combustible cigarettes. These results underscore the rationale for the implementation and enforcement of public health policies tailored to young adults.

Indexed as

COVID-19Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsVapingAgedBehavioral Risk Factor Surveillance SystemCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMalePandemicsYoung Adult

Identifiers

PMID37921768
PMCPMC10625038

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.