ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2026
US adults' complete switching away from cigarettes by menthol- and tobacco-flavored ENDS and by menthol cigarette preference: testing robustness to missing data.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Use of menthol-flavored (vs. tobacco-flavored) electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) may be associated with higher rates of complete switching among adults who smoke (AWS). This paper evaluates the association over 2 years, while considering robustness across different missing-data approaches. 22,905 US AWS and purchased JUUL ENDS were enrolled in a longitudinal cohort study and completed up to 10 follow-ups. To assess potential bias due to missingness, analyses: (a) compared participant characteristics by levels of missingness and (b) assessed whether tobacco or menthol JUUL was associated with missingness. The association of menthol (vs. tobacco) JUUL with switching (no past 30-day smoking) was evaluated using four missing-data treatments: (1) non-missing data-only; (2) imputing smoking for missing ('missing-as-smoking'); imputing outcome from participant characteristics and previous switching (3) one time, and (4) Multiple Imputations. Survey completion was minimally associated with participant characteristics (each explaining < 0.4% of variance) or flavor (< 2% between-flavor difference). In observed data, menthol was significantly associated with a higher switch rate than tobacco (adjusted risk ratio = 1.12 [95% CI = 1.09-1.16], model-based average switching probability: 51.6% vs. 45.9%). Effects were similar across all approaches, including Missing-as-Smoking (1.15 [1.11-1.18]; 44.1% vs. 38.4%), Single Imputation (1.12 [1.09-1.16]; 51.3% vs. 45.7%), and Multiple Imputation (1.11 [1.08-1.15]; 51.9% vs. 46.6%). The added benefit of menthol- (vs. tobacco-flavored) JUUL was concentrated among adults smoking non-mentholated cigarettes. AWS using menthol JUUL, especially those smoking non-menthol cigarettes, were more likely to switch completely than those using tobacco JUUL. Consistent results across several approaches suggested minimal bias due to missing data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41559253What 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.