ArticlePreventive medicine reports2023
Concept flavor e-cigarette unit sales in the U.S.: 2019-2022.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Preflavour and postflavour ban oral nicotine pouches: a chemical, sensory and young adult appeal analysis.Tobacco control · 2026Article
- Article
- College Students' Awareness of California's Law Prohibiting Sales of Flavored Tobacco.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
- Flavored Tobacco Product Use Among California Adolescents Before and Immediately After a Statewide Flavor Ban.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025Article
- Review
- Concept flavor names from English language ENDS advertising in the USA, 2015-2020.Tobacco induced diseases · 2025Article
- Factors associated with the export of traditional Chinese medicinal products: A stochastic frontier analysis.PloS one · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Concept flavor e-cigarettes, defined as products with vague/ambiguous flavor (tobacco flavor and non-tobacco flavor) names, may limit the intended impact and enforcement of flavored tobacco restrictions. This study assessed trends in unit sales of concept flavor e-cigarettes in the U.S. by volume, nicotine concentration levels (NCL), flavor and device type. Methods: We analyzed NielsenIQ Retail Scanner point-of-sales data collected from 2182 Local Trade Areas in the contiguous 48 U.S. states and the District of Columbia aggregated weekly from August 10, 2019, through April 9, 2022. Concept flavors were categorized by: flavor type (tobacco, fruity, menthol, mint, and other); device type (pods/refillable cartridges, disposables, e-liquids, and other); and NCL (0 %-2.0 %, 2.1 %-4.0 %, > 4.1 %, unknown). Joinpoint regression was used to assess sales trends. Results: Overall unit sales during the study period increased by 33.63 % from 1040.85 to 1390.88 thousand units per month (p = 0.006). Between August 2019 and September 2021, unit sales increased and peaked; between September 2021 and April 2022 sales decreased by 14.46 % (from 1626.02 to 1390.88 thousand units; p = 0.002). Sales of fruity, menthol and mint flavors concept flavor e-cigarettes increased by > 1000 %; disposable devices by 302.18 %; pods and refillable cartridges by 33.81 % overall; and products NCL > 4.0 % increased by 110.18 %. Tobacco flavor concept flavors (93.28 %), pods (94.63 %), and products with 2.1 %-4.0 % NCL (88.40 %) dominated unit share. Conclusion: Sustaining the recent overall decline in the unit sales of concept flavor e-cigarettes and monitoring the sales of products with nicotine concentration greater than 2.0%, non-tobacco flavor, and pod products warrant prioritization in tobacco control efforts.
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.