ArticleTobacco control2025
Impact of the California state flavoured tobacco sales restriction on e-cigarette use behaviours among youth.
Article in Tobacco control, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn December 2022, California prohibited the sale of most flavoured tobacco products; however, limited data are available assessing the impact on adolescent tobacco use behaviours.
methodsWe compared data from youth in 11th grade prior to (fall 2022; n=1212; 'prelaw') and after implementation of the law (fall 2023; n=1026; 'postlaw') at four schools in Southern California (panel study). We assessed past 30-day e-cigarette use, e-cigarette flavours used, perceived difficulty in getting preferred flavours and (among new initiators), flavour at first use, and support for, anticipated impact, and perceived actual impact of the law. We also assessed change in e-cigarette use behaviours prelaw, prelaw to postlaw and postlaw in the same individuals (cohort study).
resultsThere was little change in past 30-day e-cigarette use prelaw (5.8%) vs postlaw (4.1%) (p=0.11). At both time points, all new initiators (100%) reported starting vaping with a flavoured product, most reported past 30-day flavoured e-cigarette use (89.8% vs 90.9%), and most also reported that access to flavours was very or somewhat easy (85.5% vs 83.9%). Youth observed limited impact on e-cigarette use among peers. In the cohort study, few (6.3%) switched completely from e-cigarettes to another nicotine product; many (46.5%) reported no past 30-day nicotine use postlaw (demonstrating a similar pattern as prelaw).
conclusionsWe observed limited change in the use of flavoured e-cigarettes after a state-wide law restricting flavoured tobacco sales was enacted. Findings may reflect inadequate implementation (eg, insufficient enforcement efforts), which warrants further study to reduce youth access to flavoured tobacco products.
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.