scholarly journals Initiation of Traditional Cigarette Smoking after Electronic Cigarette Use Among Tobacco-Naïve US Young Adults

2018 ◽  
Vol 131 (4) ◽  
pp. 443.e1-443.e9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian A. Primack ◽  
Ariel Shensa ◽  
Jaime E. Sidani ◽  
Beth L. Hoffman ◽  
Samir Soneji ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 212-218 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. N. Coleman ◽  
B. J. Apelberg ◽  
B. K. Ambrose ◽  
K. M. Green ◽  
C. J. Choiniere ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 169 (11) ◽  
pp. 1018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian A. Primack ◽  
Samir Soneji ◽  
Michael Stoolmiller ◽  
Michael J. Fine ◽  
James D. Sargent

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Allison N. Baker ◽  
Stephen J. Wilson ◽  
John E. Hayes

AbstractElectronic cigarette use—vaping—is increasingly popular. Various product factors may influence an individual’s choice of e-cigarette. To provide an evidence base for e-cigarette regulation, a better understanding of the role different product attributes play in product preferences is needed. Here, we used conjoint analysis to quantify different factors that influence e-cigarettes choices, including flavors, nicotine level, customizability, or use of e-cigarettes to manage appetite/food craving. Young adults completed a set of choice-based conjoint tasks online. Choice Based Conjoint analysis (CBC) was used to determine utility scores for each attribute. Young adults (n = 587) who vaped at least once per week were included in analyses; gender differences were explored. Flavor was the most important attribute (48.1%), followed by product messaging (21.0%) and nicotine level (15.3%). Within flavor, confectionery and fruit flavors had the highest utility scores, while classic menthol and tobacco flavors had the lowest. Men and women differed in flavors, nicotine levels, and product messaging that appealed most. Among young adults who vape weekly, flavor is the most important factor in e-cigarette preferences. Gender also factors into e-cigarette preferences, especially for preferred nicotine level. Understanding why individuals choose particular e-cigarette products will help inform public health efforts and policy making.


2020 ◽  
Vol 55 (6) ◽  
pp. 964-972 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hala Aljandaleh ◽  
Camille Bolze ◽  
Fabienne El-Khoury Lesueur ◽  
Maria Melchior ◽  
Murielle Mary-Krause

2020 ◽  
pp. tobaccocontrol-2020-055641
Author(s):  
Raymond G Boyle ◽  
Sara Richter ◽  
Ann W St. Claire

IntroductionElectronic cigarette use has grown substantially and the health effects are being closely monitored. Tracking the evolving market place and the profile of adult users is important for tobacco control efforts; however, several different ways of measuring current use have been reported. This paper examines how well a categorical definition aligns with days of use.MethodsData from the 2018 Minnesota Adult Tobacco Survey assessed e-cigarette use based on days of use in the past month and currently using ‘every day, some days, or not at all’. Prevalence of current use and agreement of >1, >5 and >20 days of use with every day or some days were calculated.ResultsThe prevalence of e-cigarette use varied by category of use from 2.4% (≥20 days/30) to 6.0% (≥1 day/30). The highest prevalence was found among young adults reporting any use in the past 30 days (21.9%). Never smokers had low prevalence overall; however, 4.4% reported using in the past 30 days. Using at least 1 day in the past 30 days included a higher proportion of young adults (p<0.001) and never smokers (p<0.001) compared with other current use categories. Compared with every day or some days, the per cent agreement with days of use categories ranged from 89.7% to 94.4% and kappa ranged from 0.60 to 0.81.ConclusionsPrevalence and sociodemographics varied by definition of use. Asking ‘every day, some days or not at all’ in population-based studies has the advantage of aligning with cigarette smoking current use definition.


2019 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 100913
Author(s):  
Alfgeir L. Kristjansson ◽  
John P. Allegrante ◽  
Jon Sigfusson ◽  
Inga Dora Sigfusdottir

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (2) ◽  
pp. 268-279 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marshall K. Cheney ◽  
Mary Gowin ◽  
Taylor F. Wann

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document