Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40450366›Full record

ArticleJournal of cannabis research2025

Association of cigarette and e-cigarette use with cannabis-related risk perceptions and intentions.

Ronja Kleine, Barbara Isensee, Frauke Nees, Reiner Hanewinkel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cannabis research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

4 authors.

Ronja KleineInstitute for Therapy and Health Research, IFT-Nord, Kiel, Germany. kleine@ift-nord.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7585-7936
Barbara IsenseeInstitute for Therapy and Health Research, IFT-Nord, Kiel, Germany.
Frauke NeesInstitute of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, University, Kiel, Germany.
Reiner HanewinkelInstitute for Therapy and Health Research, IFT-Nord, Kiel, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study examines the associations of current use of combustible cigarettes or e-cigarettes with perceived risk of cannabis use and intention to use cannabis within the next year.

methodsData from 8,521 German adolescents were collected between autumn 2021 and spring 2022. Former but not current users of cannabis or (e-)cigarettes were excluded from analyses. Mean age was 14.0 years, and 50.6% of the sample were female. Current cannabis use was reported by 5.8%, current use of combustible and/or e-cigarettes by 17.0%. We conducted linear regression models predicting 1) risk perception by (e-)cigarette use, and 2) intention to use cannabis by (e-)cigarette use and risk perception, among never cannabis users.

resultsUse of cannabis and (e-)cigarettes were strongly associated. Perceiving cannabis as less harmful was associated with a higher intention to use cannabis. Among never cannabis users, dual users of combustible and e-cigarettes perceived cannabis as least harmful and had the highest intention to use cannabis, followed by combustible cigarette-only users, and then e-cigarette-only users. Never combustible nor e-cigarette users perceived cannabis as most harmful and had the lowest intention to use cannabis.

conclusionPerception of cannabis as harmful might be a protective factor for intentions to use cannabis among German adolescents. Prevention programs should consider that adolescent combustible and e-cigarette users are a high-risk group for initiation of cannabis use.

Indexed as

AdolescenceCannabisCombustible cigaretteE-cigaretteRisk perceptionUse intention

Identifiers

PMID40450366
PMCPMC12126890

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.