ArticleTobacco control2025
Responses to e-cigarette nicotine source descriptors: results from a randomised experiment.
Article in Tobacco control, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inflammatory Biomarker Profiles in Gingival Crevicular Fluid of Electronic Cigarette Users: A Cross-Sectional Study.Dentistry journal · 2026Article
- Examining the impact of e-cigarette advertisement exposure with fruit flavour features among US young adults of varying tobacco-use statuses.Tobacco control · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundE-cigarettes made with synthetic nicotine are often marketed using "tobacco-free nicotine" and "non-tobacco nicotine" descriptors. The purpose of this study was to determine whether variations in nicotine source descriptors impacted young adult perceptions of e-cigarette harm and addictive potential, and susceptibility to e-cigarette product use.
methodsWe conducted an online between-groups experiment among young adults (aged 21-29). Participants were randomly assigned to view an advertisement for a fictional e-cigarette brand with one of four nicotine source descriptors: "Made with … "synthetic nicotine"; "tobacco-free nicotine"; "non-tobacco nicotine"; "nicotine from tobacco"; or a control (no descriptor). Outcomes included harm perceptions, addictiveness perceptions and susceptibility to use. Analyses were stratified by past 30-day e-cigarette users (n=642) and past 30-day non-e-cigarette/tobacco users (n=670).
resultsAmong past 30-day e-cigarette users, mean e-cigarette harm and addictiveness perceptions varied across conditions (all p values <0.05), though susceptibility to use the advertised product did not (p=0.564). Among non-e-cigarette/tobacco users, mean scores for select perceived harm (conditional product harm, p=0.005; unconditional nicotine harm, p<0.001) and addictiveness outcomes (relative addictiveness vs other e-cigarettes, p=0.026) varied by condition. Susceptibility to using the advertised product (p=0.328) did not vary across condition among non-e-cigarette/tobacco users. Pairwise comparisons revealed that mean differences were primarily driven by reduced harm and addictiveness perceptions for descriptors communicating absence of tobacco (ie, "non-tobacco nicotine").
conclusionsNicotine source descriptors, especially "non-tobacco nicotine" and among past 30-day e-cigarette users, may reduce harm and addictiveness perceptions for e-cigarettes. Marketing regulations of nicotine source descriptors may be needed.
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.