Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41368708›Full record

Trial reportNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2026

Patterns of e-Cigarette Use and Smoking Cessation Outcomes: Secondary Analysis of a Large Randomised Controlled Trial to Inform Clinical Advice.

Francesca Pesola, Katie Myers Smith, Dunja Przulj, Daniella Ladmore, Anna Phillips-Waller, Hayden McRobbie, Peter Hajek

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Toxicity and Appeal of Flavoured E-Cigarettes and Flavour Ban Outcomes: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026
    Review
  6. 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

7 authors.

Francesca PesolaWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2054-7930
Katie Myers SmithWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Dunja PrzuljWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Daniella LadmoreWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Anna Phillips-WallerWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.
Hayden McRobbieWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7777-1845
Peter HajekWolfson Institute of Population Health, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK.

Funding

Barts Hospital Charity G-002207
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionLimited data exist on how to use e-cigarettes (EC) to optimize smoking cessation.

methodsWe examined associations between patterns of EC use and outcomes at 1 year in a large trial (N = 886) comparing nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) and EC.

resultsUse of tobacco flavor was limited and associated with a lower smoking cessation rate compared to other flavors (relative risk; RR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.35 to 0.89). EC users reduced nicotine strength over time. Abstainers using EC reported lower urges to smoke than abstainers using NRT at both weeks 1 (b = -0.25, 95% CI = -0.45 to -0.04) and 4 (b = -0.37, 95% CI = -0.58 to -0.16). Participants using both cigarettes and EC (dual users) at week 1 were more likely to stop smoking at week 4 than exclusive smokers (RR = 4.45, 95% CI = 1.96 to 10.10). Dual users at 4 weeks and 6 months were also more likely to achieve validated 50% reduction in smoke intake at 1 year (RR = 2.37, 95% CI = 1.36 to 4.11 and RR = 4.56, 95% CI = 2.71 to 7.66, respectively).

conclusionsNon-tobacco flavors were preferred and may be also more effective. Urges to smoke were lower in EC users than in users of NRT. Dual use was associated with a reduction in smoking and quitting smoking later on. IMPLICATIONS: Clinicians advising smokers wanting to use EC as a quitting aid can consider recommending non-tobacco flavors; explaining that EC reduce urges to smoke more than combination NRT; and reassuring those worried about dual use that such use is associated with reduced smoking and a higher chance of stopping smoking altogether later on.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsSmoking CessationVapingAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedTobacco Use Cessation DevicesTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID41368708
PMCPMC13196703

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.