ArticleBMJ public health2025
Vaping health perceptions and never vaping among Australian adolescents: a strength-based analysis of cross-sectional survey data.
Article in BMJ public health, 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.
- Factors Associated With Victorian Adolescents' Harm Perceptions and Attitudes About e-Cigarettes.Health promotion journal of Australia : official journal of Australian Association of Health Promotion Professionals · 2026Article
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
abstractIntroduction: Curbing adolescent vaping is a public health priority and little evidence exists examining protective factors. Using a strength-based approach, this study explored the relationship between adolescent vaping health perceptions and vaping use. Methods: Cross-sectional data from 9000 Australian adolescents aged 14-17 years recruited via multiple online panels as part of the Generation Vape Study were used. Logistic regression compared never vs ever vaping, and inversed multinomial logistic regression compared never vaping to four lifetime vaping categories (ranging from use on a few to >100 occasions) for eight health perceptions. Results: Overall, 66% (5948/9000) of participants reported never vaping. Within all vaping categories, most agreed that vapes are unsafe, can harm the lungs and brain and can cause addiction, and disagreed that nicotine is harmless. Compared with those who disagreed/strongly disagreed, the odds of never vs ever vaping were greater among those who agreed/strongly agreed that vapes are unsafe to use (adjusted OR=2.67; 95% CI 2.17 to 3.27), can harm the developing brain (2.61; 2.05 to 3.33), can damage the lungs (1.61; 1.23 to 2.10), can cause addiction (2.32; 1.79 to 3.00) and that they are unsafe to use around others (2.94; 2.48 to 3.49). Compared with those who agreed/strongly agreed that nicotine is harmless, there were greater odds of never use (vs ever use) among those who disagreed/strongly disagreed (1.75; 1.44 to 2.11). The protective relationship remained across different lifetime vaping categories. Neither agreeing nor disagreeing was not generally a factor protective against vaping. Conclusion: Perceptions of vape harms appear protective against experimental and regular vaping. Young people vape despite the majority of users being aware of harms, suggesting knowledge alone is an unlikely driver of behaviour. Comprehensive control efforts that embrace a suite of actions including education, policy, enforcement and monitoring activities are needed to best protect adolescent health.
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.