ArticleTobacco induced diseases2024
Assessing the public discourse on Twitter: Reactions to the JUUL e-cigarettes ban in the United States.
Article in Tobacco induced diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- FDA authorisation of Zyn nicotine pouches: cross-sectional analysis of public discourse on X.Tobacco control · 2026Article
- Generative AI in a new era of computer model-informed tobacco research: a short report.Tobacco control · 2026Article
- Public Perceptions and Discussions of the US Food and Drug Administration's JUUL Ban Policy on Twitter: Observational Study.JMIR formative research · 2024Article
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
introductionJUUL is a high-nicotine pod-based vaping device that is popular among adolescents and young adults. On 23 June 2022, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) denied authorization to market JUUL, and ordered JUUL Labs to remove products from the US market. The next day, a US federal appeals court temporarily suspended the ban. The mixed public discourse surrounding the FDA ban warrants further investigation.
methodsThis study examined Twitter data to describe public reaction to these announcements. Posts containing terms 'JUUL' and/or '#JUUL' (N=97548 unique tweets) were collected from 23 June to 3 July 2022, from Twitter's Streaming Application Programming Interface (API). After removing retweets, we used an inductive approach to become familiar with the data, generated a codebook, and conducted a content analysis on a random sample of n=4000 tweets.
resultsA total of 2755 (68.9%) tweets discussed JUUL in the context of the FDA ban. News (n=1425/2755; 51.7%) about the JUUL ban, government distrust (n=588; 21.3%), and individual rights (n=253; 9.2%) were the most prevalent themes. Less commonly discussed themes included inconsistencies between policies (n=174; 6.3%), mentions of switching to other products (n=162; 5.9%), smoking cessation (n=99; 3.6%), and craving for JUUL (n=94; 3.4%). Sentiment analysis of JUUL ban-related posts (n=2755) demonstrated that 1989 (72.2%) tweets were categorized as neutral, while anti-ban posts (n=566; 20.5%) were more prevalent than pro-ban posts (n=200; 7.3%).
conclusionsBesides straightforward announcements of the JUUL ban and its suspension, Twitter posts discussed government distrust, individual rights, and policy inconsistencies. While most posts conveyed neutral sentiments, anti-ban posts were almost three times more prevalent than pro-ban posts. Our findings suggest that text-based social media platforms like Twitter may be an effective instrument to understand opinions, attitudes, and beliefs regarding the FDA's JUUL ban.
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.