ArticleCureus2025
Impact of Vaping on Hospital Outcomes in Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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.
- Current Insights into Clinical, Molecular, and Therapeutic Approaches to Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Introduced in the early 2000s, e-cigarettes and vaping have risen in popularity, leading to a notable increase in acute lung injury and the coining of electronic cigarette or vaping-associated lung injury (EVALI). Current studies have examined outcomes in EVALI specifically; however, data on the impact of vaping in acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is lacking. Thus, the objective of this study is to investigate the impact of vaping on hospital outcomes in patients with ARDS. Materials and methods This study is a retrospective chart review utilizing the Hospital Corporation of America (HCA) Healthcare Far West Division database. Unique patient encounters between January 1, 2016, and July 31, 2022, were included if they were associated with a diagnosis of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and had documented vaping status. Pediatric patients under the age of 18 years were excluded. Due to the retrospective nature of the study, no interventions were performed. Outcomes were stratified and compared based on vaping status. Demographics and comorbidities were controlled for in the analysis. Measurements Patient demographics and medical comorbidities were extracted and analyzed. Key hospital outcomes of interest include use of non-invasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV), use of mechanical ventilation, hospital and intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay (LOS), and mortality. Statistical analysis of comorbidities was performed using chi-square analyses and Fisher's exact test between the two groups. Multinomial logistic regression was used to analyze the type of respiratory support required, while negative binomial regression was used to analyze hospital and ICU length of stay. Binary logistical regression with Firth correction was used to analyze differences in mortality. Statistical significance for all analyses was defined as a p-value of less than 0.05. Odds ratios were calculated with a 95% confidence interval. All analyses controlled for age, BMI, sex, medical comorbidities, and smoking status. Results A total of 269 patients were identified, of whom 42 vaped. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences in demographics between those who vaped and those who did not. Fifty-seven patients required NIPPV, of whom 12 vaped. Eighty patients required mechanical ventilation, of whom seven vaped. Binary logistic regression with a Firth correction revealed a statistically significant decrease in odds (odds ratio {OR}: 0.377; 95% CI: 0.145, 0.979; p=0.045) of requiring mechanical ventilation in patients who vaped compared to those who did not. There were 15 mortalities, of whom four vaped. Binary logistic regression did not reveal statistical significance in mortality. The average hospital length of stay was 8.94 days, and the average length of stay (ICU LOS) was 5.48 days. Negative binomial regression revealed no statistically significant difference in both hospital and ICU LOS between patients who vaped and those who did not. Conclusion While statistical analysis did reveal a significantly decreased odds ratio of requiring mechanical ventilation in patients who vaped, the power of this and other findings was low, given a sample size of 42 who vaped. Despite its limitations, the study shares some preliminary insight into vaping and ARDS for future studies.
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.