ArticleTobacco induced diseases2026
Cognitive confusion: A cross-sectional study on the cognitive differences between traditional tobacco and e-cigarettes among college students in Zhejiang Province, China.
Article in Tobacco induced diseases, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThis study aimed to explore the differences in knowledge and cognitive perceptions of traditional tobacco and e-cigarettes among college students in Zhejiang Province, China, and to provide evidence-based insights for future prevention and control strategies.
methodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted in September 2020 among students from nine undergraduate institutions in Zhejiang Province, selected through a combination of typical and convenience sampling. An anonymous online questionnaire was used to collect data on tobacco-related knowledge, usage behavior, and cognitive perceptions. Statistical analyses included chi-squared tests, rank-sum tests, logistic regression, McNemar's tests, and Cohen's kappa (κ) to assess differences and consistency in knowledge regarding traditional tobacco and e-cigarettes.
resultsA total of 728 valid responses were obtained. Among the respondents, 9.20% were current smokers and 6.73% were current e-cigarette users, of whom 1.37 % used e-cigarettes exclusively. Only 42.72% of respondents showed high knowledge of e-cigarettes, significantly lower than the 80.36% for traditional tobacco (χ
conclusionsCollege students demonstrated significantly lower awareness of e-cigarettes compared to traditional tobacco, with notable cognitive inconsistency regarding health risks. The prevalence of misinformation, especially from online sources, underscores the urgent need for targeted education and control measures to address cognitive confusion and improve awareness of e-cigarette risks.
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.