Pongkwan Yimsaard1, Ann McNeill2,3, Hua-Hie Yong4, K Michael Cummings5, Janet Chung-Hall6, Summer Sherburne Hawkins7,8, Ann C K Quah6, Geoffrey T Fong6,9, Richard J O'Connor10, Sara C Hitchman2,3. 1. Department of Psychiatry, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. 2. National Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College London, London, UK. 3. UK Center for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, UK. 4. School of Psychology, Deakin University, Geelong, VIC, Australia. 5. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, SC, USA. 6. Department of Psychology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada. 7. Boston College, School of Social Work, Chestnut Hill, MA, USA. 8. Department of Global Health and Social Medicine, King's College London, London, UK. 9. Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, ON, Canada. 10. Department of Health Behavior, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Little is known about why males are more likely to use electronic cigarettes (ECs) compared with females. This study examined gender differences in reasons for vaping and characteristics of EC used (device type, device capacity, e-liquid nicotine strength, and flavor). METHODS: Data were obtained from 3938 current (≥18 years) at-least-weekly EC users who participated in Wave 2 (2018) ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey in Canada, the United States, England, and Australia. RESULTS: Of the sample, 54% were male. The most commonly cited reasons for vaping in females were "less harmful to others" (85.8%) and in males were "less harmful than cigarettes" (85.5%), with females being more likely to cite "less harmful to others" (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.64, p = .001) and "help cut down on cigarettes" (aOR = 1.60, p = .001) than males. Significant gender differences were found in EC device type used (χ 2 = 35.05, p = .043). Females were less likely to report using e-liquids containing >20 mg/mL of nicotine, and tank devices with >2 mL capacity (aOR = 0.41, p < .001 and aOR = 0.65, p = .026, respectively) than males. There was no significant gender difference in use of flavored e-liquids, with fruit being the most common flavor for both males (54.5%) and females (50.2%). CONCLUSION: There were some gender differences in reasons for vaping and characteristics of the product used. Monitoring of gender differences in patterns of EC use would be useful to inform outreach activities and interventions for EC use. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings provide some evidence of gender differences in reasons for vaping and characteristics of EC used. The most common reason for vaping reported by females was "less harmful to others," which may reflect greater concern by female vapers about the adverse effects of secondhand smoke compared with male vapers. Gender differences might be considered when designing gender-sensitive smoking cessation policies. Regarding characteristics of EC products used, we found gender differences in preferences for e-liquid nicotine strength and device capacity. Further studies should examine whether the observed gender differences in EC use reasons and product characteristics are predictive of smoking cessation. Furthermore, studies monitoring gender-based marketing of ECs may be considered.
INTRODUCTION: Little is known about why males are more likely to use electronic cigarettes (ECs) compared with females. This study examined gender differences in reasons for vaping and characteristics of EC used (device type, device capacity, e-liquid nicotine strength, and flavor). METHODS: Data were obtained from 3938 current (≥18 years) at-least-weekly EC users who participated in Wave 2 (2018) ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Survey in Canada, the United States, England, and Australia. RESULTS: Of the sample, 54% were male. The most commonly cited reasons for vaping in females were "less harmful to others" (85.8%) and in males were "less harmful than cigarettes" (85.5%), with females being more likely to cite "less harmful to others" (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 1.64, p = .001) and "help cut down on cigarettes" (aOR = 1.60, p = .001) than males. Significant gender differences were found in EC device type used (χ 2 = 35.05, p = .043). Females were less likely to report using e-liquids containing >20 mg/mL of nicotine, and tank devices with >2 mL capacity (aOR = 0.41, p < .001 and aOR = 0.65, p = .026, respectively) than males. There was no significant gender difference in use of flavored e-liquids, with fruit being the most common flavor for both males (54.5%) and females (50.2%). CONCLUSION: There were some gender differences in reasons for vaping and characteristics of the product used. Monitoring of gender differences in patterns of EC use would be useful to inform outreach activities and interventions for EC use. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings provide some evidence of gender differences in reasons for vaping and characteristics of EC used. The most common reason for vaping reported by females was "less harmful to others," which may reflect greater concern by female vapers about the adverse effects of secondhand smoke compared with male vapers. Gender differences might be considered when designing gender-sensitive smoking cessation policies. Regarding characteristics of EC products used, we found gender differences in preferences for e-liquid nicotine strength and device capacity. Further studies should examine whether the observed gender differences in EC use reasons and product characteristics are predictive of smoking cessation. Furthermore, studies monitoring gender-based marketing of ECs may be considered.
Authors: Mary E Thompson; Geoffrey T Fong; Christian Boudreau; Pete Driezen; Grace Li; Shannon Gravely; K Michael Cummings; Bryan W Heckman; Richard O'Connor; James F Thrasher; Georges Nahhas; Ron Borland; Hua-Hie Yong; Ann McNeill; Sara C Hitchman; Anne C K Quah Journal: Addiction Date: 2019-01-24 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Allison M Glasser; Lauren Collins; Jennifer L Pearson; Haneen Abudayyeh; Raymond S Niaura; David B Abrams; Andrea C Villanti Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2016-11-30 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: Richard J O'Connor; Brian V Fix; Ann McNeill; Maciej L Goniewicz; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Bryan W Heckman; K Michael Cummings; Sara Hitchman; Ron Borland; David Hammond; David Levy; Shannon Gravely; Geoffrey T Fong Journal: Addiction Date: 2019-04-30 Impact factor: 6.526
Authors: Judy Kruger; Amal Jama; Michelle Kegler; Kristy Marynak; Brian King Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2016-08-31 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Terry Gordon; Emma Karey; Meghan E Rebuli; Yael-Natalie H Escobar; Ilona Jaspers; Lung Chi Chen Journal: Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol Date: 2021-09-23 Impact factor: 16.459
Authors: Philip Baiden; Hannah S Szlyk; Patricia Cavazos-Rehg; Henry K Onyeaka; JaNiene E Peoples; Erin Kasson Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2021-12-22 Impact factor: 5.250
Authors: Steve S Xu; Gang Meng; Mi Yan; Shannon Gravely; Anne C K Quah; Janine Ouimet; Richard J O'Connor; Edward Sutanto; Itsuro Yoshimi; Yumiko Mochizuki; Takahiro Tabuchi; Geoffrey T Fong Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-10-31 Impact factor: 3.390