Allison M Glasser1, Lauren Collins2, Jennifer L Pearson2, Haneen Abudayyeh2, Raymond S Niaura3, David B Abrams3, Andrea C Villanti4. 1. The Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies at Truth Initiative, Washington, District of Columbia. Electronic address: aglasser@truthinitiative.org. 2. The Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies at Truth Initiative, Washington, District of Columbia. 3. The Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies at Truth Initiative, Washington, District of Columbia; Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland; Georgetown University Medical Center, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, District of Columbia. 4. The Schroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies at Truth Initiative, Washington, District of Columbia; Department of Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Rapid developments in e-cigarettes, or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), and the evolution of the overall tobacco product marketplace warrant frequent evaluation of the published literature. The purpose of this article is to report updated findings from a comprehensive review of the published scientific literature on ENDS. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The authors conducted a systematic review of published empirical research literature on ENDS through May 31, 2016, using a detailed search strategy in the PubMed electronic database, expert review, and additional targeted searches. Included studies presented empirical findings and were coded to at least one of nine topics: (1) Product Features; (2) Health Effects; (3) Consumer Perceptions; (4) Patterns of Use; (5) Potential to Induce Dependence; (6) Smoking Cessation; (7) Marketing and Communication; (8) Sales; and (9) Policies; reviews and commentaries were excluded. Data from included studies were extracted by multiple coders (October 2015 to August 2016) into a standardized form and synthesized qualitatively by topic. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: There were 687 articles included in this systematic review. The majority of studies assessed patterns of ENDS use and consumer perceptions of ENDS, followed by studies examining health effects of vaping and product features. CONCLUSIONS: Studies indicate that ENDS are increasing in use, particularly among current smokers, pose substantially less harm to smokers than cigarettes, are being used to reduce/quit smoking, and are widely available. More longitudinal studies and controlled trials are needed to evaluate the impact of ENDS on population-level tobacco use and determine the health effects of longer-term vaping.
CONTEXT: Rapid developments in e-cigarettes, or electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), and the evolution of the overall tobacco product marketplace warrant frequent evaluation of the published literature. The purpose of this article is to report updated findings from a comprehensive review of the published scientific literature on ENDS. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: The authors conducted a systematic review of published empirical research literature on ENDS through May 31, 2016, using a detailed search strategy in the PubMed electronic database, expert review, and additional targeted searches. Included studies presented empirical findings and were coded to at least one of nine topics: (1) Product Features; (2) Health Effects; (3) Consumer Perceptions; (4) Patterns of Use; (5) Potential to Induce Dependence; (6) Smoking Cessation; (7) Marketing and Communication; (8) Sales; and (9) Policies; reviews and commentaries were excluded. Data from included studies were extracted by multiple coders (October 2015 to August 2016) into a standardized form and synthesized qualitatively by topic. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: There were 687 articles included in this systematic review. The majority of studies assessed patterns of ENDS use and consumer perceptions of ENDS, followed by studies examining health effects of vaping and product features. CONCLUSIONS: Studies indicate that ENDS are increasing in use, particularly among current smokers, pose substantially less harm to smokers than cigarettes, are being used to reduce/quit smoking, and are widely available. More longitudinal studies and controlled trials are needed to evaluate the impact of ENDS on population-level tobacco use and determine the health effects of longer-term vaping.
Authors: Alexa A Lopez; Marzena M Hiler; Eric K Soule; Carolina P Ramôa; Nareg V Karaoghlanian; Thokozeni Lipato; Alison B Breland; Alan L Shihadeh; Thomas Eissenberg Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2015-09-16 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Jieming Zhong; Shuangshuang Cao; Weiwei Gong; Fangrong Fei; Meng Wang Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2016-05-03 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Marco Ferrari; Alessandro Zanasi; Elena Nardi; Antonio Maria Morselli Labate; Piero Ceriana; Antonella Balestrino; Lara Pisani; Nadia Corcione; Stefano Nava Journal: BMC Pulm Med Date: 2015-10-12 Impact factor: 3.317
Authors: Israel T Agaku; Brian A King; Corinne G Husten; Rebecca Bunnell; Bridget K Ambrose; S Sean Hu; Enver Holder-Hayes; Hannah R Day Journal: MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep Date: 2014-06-27 Impact factor: 17.586
Authors: Cassandra A Stanton; Eva Sharma; Kathryn C Edwards; Michael J Halenar; Kristie A Taylor; Karin A Kasza; Hannah Day; Gabriella Anic; Lisa D Gardner; Hoda T Hammad; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Jean Limpert; Nicolette Borek; Heather L Kimmel; Wilson M Compton; Andrew Hyland Journal: Tob Control Date: 2020-05 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Alexsandra Ratajczak; Wojciech Feleszko; Danielle M Smith; Maciej Goniewicz Journal: Expert Rev Respir Med Date: 2018-06-08 Impact factor: 3.772
Authors: Claire Adams Spears; Dina M Jones; Scott R Weaver; Terry F Pechacek; Michael P Eriksen Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2018-01-16 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Mignonne C Guy; Jacob Helt; Sherilyn Palafox; Kellie Green; Eric K Soule; Sarah F Maloney; Thomas Eissenberg; Pebbles Fagan Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-09-19 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Karen O Brandon; Vani N Simmons; Lauren R Meltzer; David J Drobes; Úrsula Martínez; Steven K Sutton; Amanda M Palmer; Christopher R Bullen; Paul T Harrell; Thomas H Brandon Journal: Addiction Date: 2019-02-13 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Dorothy A Rhoades; Ashley L Comiford; Justin D Dvorak; Kai Ding; Leslie M Driskill; Audrea M Hopkins; Paul Spicer; Theodore L Wagener; Mark P Doescher Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2019-08-01 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Ron Borland; Krista Murray; Shannon Gravely; Geoffrey T Fong; Mary E Thompson; Ann McNeill; Richard J O'Connor; Maciej L Goniewicz; Hua-Hie Yong; David T Levy; Bryan W Heckman; K Michael Cummings Journal: Addiction Date: 2019-04-02 Impact factor: 6.526