Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40934512›Full record

ArticleJMIR formative research2025

A Youth-Centered Digital Infographic on Vaping Risks (What's in a Vape?): Mixed Methods Study.

Kendra Nelson Ferguson, Kyla Christianson, Adrian Delgado, Gina Martin, Stephanie E Coen, Laura Struik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR formative 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

6 authors.

Kendra Nelson Ferguson *Western University, London, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-1767-8147
Kyla Christianson *University of British Columbia Okanagan, Kelowna, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-1185-0441
Adrian Delgado *University of British Columbia Okanagan, Kelowna, BC, Canada.ORCID 0009-0005-6565-1415
Gina Martin *Athabasca University, Alberta, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5295-316X
Stephanie E Coen *University of Nottingham, Nottingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-3939-8792
Laura Struik *University of British Columbia Okanagan, Kelowna, BC, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-7175-7308

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAs youth engagement with traditional public health warnings declines, innovative strategies are needed. Visually compelling, youth-driven digital content such as interactive infographics may help bridge knowledge gaps, enhance risk perception, and support more informed decision-making. Despite this potential, limited research has assessed its effectiveness in conveying vaping-related harms to youth.

objectiveTo address this gap, this study evaluated the impact of a codeveloped, youth-informed digital infographic (What's in a Vape?) on enhancing vaping education and improving youth understanding of vaping-related harms.

methodsA convergent parallel mixed methods design was used to assess the impact of a youth-informed digital infographic. The infographic was created in collaboration with youth coresearchers and youth advisory councils to ensure relevance. Participants were recruited through community partners, school boards, and youth networks. By May 2024, we had enrolled 63 high school students aged 14 to 19 years (mean age 16.5, SD 1.2 years) primarily from Ontario and British Columbia. The survey evaluated baseline knowledge of vaping, engagement with the infographic, and postexposure perceptions on whether the content contributed to increased awareness or understanding of vaping.

resultsData collection took place between April 2024 and May 2024. Quantitative analysis showed that 87% (55/63) of participants agreed that the infographic effectively communicated key information, and 86% (54/63) gained new knowledge about vaping. In addition, 73% (46/63) found that the infographic was presented in an easy and meaningful way, whereas 52% (33/63) indicated that they would definitely share it with others, reflecting strong engagement. However, over half (33/63, 52%) also found the amount of information excessive, and 17% (11/63) found it difficult to digest, indicating variation in youth information preferences. Thematic analysis of qualitative feedback revealed four key themes: (1) the visual content enabled gaining new insights into and knowledge of vaping, (2) the visual design had a positive impact on engagement with information, (3) sourced information enhanced the credibility of the infographic information, and (4) the digital design of the infographic made complex information more understandable. Qualitative insights contextualized and supported the quantitative findings, highlighting both benefits and areas for improvement.

conclusionsThis study demonstrates that youth-driven digital infographics may serve as useful health communication tools. Findings highlight the importance of peer-led design; evidence-based content; and interactive, visually compelling formats in enhancing youth comprehension and receptiveness to health messaging. By integrating youth feedback into development and prioritizing digital engagement, the infographic bridged knowledge gaps while reinforcing the credibility of its content. Variability in feedback about content overload suggests that future versions should consider more layered or modular designs. Results suggest that such approaches may complement broader public health strategies to curb youth vaping and inform future educational interventions. Continued research is warranted to assess long-term impacts on attitudes and behavior.

Indexed as

Health Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeStudentsVapingAdolescentBritish ColumbiaFemaleHumansMaleOntarioSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adulthealth communicationmixed methodsyouth-centered digital infographicyouth vaping

Identifiers

PMID40934512
PMCPMC12464500

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.