Stephanie T Lanza1, Michael A Russell2, Jessica L Braymiller3. 1. The Methodology Center, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA; Department of Biobehavioral Health, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. Electronic address: SLanza@psu.edu. 2. The Methodology Center, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA. 3. The Methodology Center, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA; Department of Biobehavioral Health, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are increasingly used by US adolescents and may be a gateway to traditional cigarette use. We examine rates of both products by age and examine differences in age-varying rates by sex and race/ethnicity. METHODS: Data are from the 2014 National Youth Tobacco Survey, a national sample of US middle and high school students (n=22.007); students ages 11-19 were included. Past 30-day e-cigarette and traditional cigarette use were examined as a function of age; sex and race/ethnicity were included as moderators. The age-varying association between e-cigarette and traditional cigarette use was also examined. RESULTS: Rates of e-cigarette use increase faster than traditional cigarette use from ages 13-16. Compared to females, males had higher rates of e-cigarette use from ages 14-17.5 and traditional cigarette use from ages 15-18. Between ages 12-14, more Hispanic adolescents used e-cigarettes compared to White or Black adolescents; after age 14 Hispanics and Whites reported similar rates, peaking at twice the rate for Blacks. Hispanic adolescents report greater traditional cigarette use versus Whites between ages 12-13, but lower rates between ages 15-18. E-cigarette use was strongly associated with traditional cigarette use, particularly during early adolescence [OR>40 before age 12]. CONCLUSIONS: Young Hispanic adolescents are at elevated risk for use of e-cigarettes and traditional cigarettes during early adolescence. During early adolescence, youth using e-cigarettes are more likely to smoke traditional cigarettes compared to youth not using e-cigarettes. The study of age-varying effects holds promise for advancing understanding of disparities in health risk behaviors.
BACKGROUND: Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) are increasingly used by US adolescents and may be a gateway to traditional cigarette use. We examine rates of both products by age and examine differences in age-varying rates by sex and race/ethnicity. METHODS: Data are from the 2014 National Youth Tobacco Survey, a national sample of US middle and high school students (n=22.007); students ages 11-19 were included. Past 30-day e-cigarette and traditional cigarette use were examined as a function of age; sex and race/ethnicity were included as moderators. The age-varying association between e-cigarette and traditional cigarette use was also examined. RESULTS: Rates of e-cigarette use increase faster than traditional cigarette use from ages 13-16. Compared to females, males had higher rates of e-cigarette use from ages 14-17.5 and traditional cigarette use from ages 15-18. Between ages 12-14, more Hispanic adolescents used e-cigarettes compared to White or Black adolescents; after age 14 Hispanics and Whites reported similar rates, peaking at twice the rate for Blacks. Hispanic adolescents report greater traditional cigarette use versus Whites between ages 12-13, but lower rates between ages 15-18. E-cigarette use was strongly associated with traditional cigarette use, particularly during early adolescence [OR>40 before age 12]. CONCLUSIONS: Young Hispanic adolescents are at elevated risk for use of e-cigarettes and traditional cigarettes during early adolescence. During early adolescence, youth using e-cigarettes are more likely to smoke traditional cigarettes compared to youth not using e-cigarettes. The study of age-varying effects holds promise for advancing understanding of disparities in health risk behaviors.
Authors: Tushar Singh; Israel T Agaku; René A Arrazola; Kristy L Marynak; Linda J Neff; Italia T Rolle; Brian A King Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2016-05 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Lauren Porter; Jennifer Duke; Meredith Hennon; David Dekevich; Erik Crankshaw; Ghada Homsi; Matthew Farrelly Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-05-13 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Benjelene D Sutherland; Nilofar Fallah-Sohy; Maciej Kopera; Andrzej Jakubczyk; Matthew T Sutherland; Elisa M Trucco Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2022-05-16 Impact factor: 4.852
Authors: Tracy T Smith; Dorothy K Hatsukami; Neal L Benowitz; Suzanne M Colby; F Joseph McClernon; Andrew A Strasser; Jennifer W Tidey; Cassidy M White; Eric C Donny Journal: Prev Med Date: 2018-03-29 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Kimberley R Isett; Simone Rosenblum; Julie Ann Barna; Diana Hicks; Gregg H Gilbert; Julia Melkers Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2018-11 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Melissa B Harrell; Baojiang Chen; Stephanie L Clendennen; Aslesha Sumbe; Kathleen R Case; Anna V Wilkinson; Alexandra Loukas; Cheryl L Perry Journal: Prev Med Date: 2021-06-01 Impact factor: 4.637
Authors: Jason E Martinez; Doron D Kahana; Simran Ghuman; Haley P Wilson; Julian Wilson; Samuel C J Kim; Venu Lagishetty; Jonathan P Jacobs; Amiya P Sinha-Hikim; Theodore C Friedman Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2021-06-08 Impact factor: 5.555