ArticleStats2024
Investigating Risk Factors for Racial Disparity in E-Cigarette Use with PATH Study.
Article in Stats, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Unveiling Oral Health Impacts of Vaping in African Americans through Untargeted Metabolomics and Proteomics.Environment & health (Washington, D.C.) · 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Previous research has identified differences in e-cigarette use and socioeconomic factors between different racial groups However, there is little research examining specific risk factors contributing to the racial differences. Objective: This study sought to identify racial disparities in e-cigarette use and to determine risk factors that help explain these differences. Methods: We used Wave 5 (2018-2019) of the Adult Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) Study. First, we conducted descriptive statistics of e-smoking across our risk factor variables. Next, we used multiple logistic regression to check the risk effects by adjusting all covariates. Finally, we conducted a mediation analysis to determine whether identified factors showed evidence of influencing the association between race and e-cigarette use. All analyses were performed in R or SAS. The R package mma was used for the mediation analysis. Results: Between Hispanic and non-Hispanic White populations, our potential risk factors collectively explain 17.5% of the racial difference, former cigarette smoking explains 7.6%, receiving e-cigarette advertising 2.6%, and perception of e-cigarette harm explains 27.8% of the racial difference. Between non-Hispanic Black and non-Hispanic White populations, former cigarette smoking, receiving e-cigarette advertising, and perception of e-cigarette harm explain 5.2%, 1.8%, and 6.8% of the racial difference, respectively. E-cigarette use is most prevalent in the non-Hispanic White population compared to non-Hispanic Black and Hispanic populations, which may be explained by former cigarette smoking, exposure to e-cigarette advertising, and e-cigarette harm perception. Conclusions: These findings suggest that racial differences in e-cigarette use may be reduced by increasing knowledge of the dangers associated with e-cigarette use and reducing exposure to e-cigarette advertisements. This comprehensive analysis of risk factors can be used to significantly guide smoking cessation efforts and address potential health burden disparities arising from differences in e-cigarette usage.
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.