MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625107572 · doi:10.1093/ntr/ntx138

Nicotine Delivery to the Aerosol of a Heat-Not-Burn Tobacco Product: Comparison With a Tobacco Cigarette and E-Cigarettes

2017· article· en· W2625107572 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNicotine & Tobacco Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTobacco productNicotineAerosolMedicineCigarette smokingEnvironmental healthChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The purpose was to measure nicotine levels to the tobacco and levels emitted to the aerosol of a heat-not-burn product (HnB, IQOS) compared to e-cigarettes (ECs) and a tobacco cigarette. Methods: The HnB device and regular and menthol sticks were purchased from Italy. Three types of ECs (ciga-like, eGo-style, and variable wattage) and a commercially-available tobacco cigarette were also tested. A custom-made liquid containing 2% nicotine was used with ECs. Products were tested using Health Canada Intense puffing regime while HnB and ECs were additionally tested using a 4-second puff duration regime while maintaining the same puff volume. Results: Nicotine content in HnB regular and menthol tobacco sticks was 15.2 ± 1.1 mg/g and 15.6 ± 1.7 mg/g tobacco respectively. The levels of nicotine to the aerosol were similar for regular and menthol HnB products (1.40 ± 0.16 and 1.38 ± 0.11 mg/12 puffs respectively) and did not change significantly with prolonged puff duration. The tobacco cigarette delivered the highest level of nicotine (1.99 ± 0.20 mg/cigarette), with levels being higher than HnB and ECs under Health Canada Intense regime but similar to eGo-style and variable wattage ECs at prolonged puff duration regime. Conclusions: The HnB product delivers nicotine to the aerosol at levels higher than ECs but lower than a tobacco cigarette when tested using Health Canada Intense puffing regime. No change in HnB nicotine delivery was observed at prolonged puff duration with the same puff volume, unlike ECs which deliver more nicotine with longer puff duration. Implications: Nicotine delivery to the smoker is expected to play an important role in the ability of any harm-reduction product to successfully substitute smoking. This study evaluated the content and nicotine delivery to the aerosol of a heat-not-burn tobacco product (IQOS) in comparison with e-cigarettes and a tobacco cigarette. The main findings were that the heat-not-burn tobacco sticks contained similar nicotine concentration to tobacco cigarettes, and that the levels of nicotine delivered to the aerosol of the heat-not-burn products were lower than tobacco cigarette, higher than e-cigarettes at low puff duration but lower than high-power e-cigarettes at longer puff duration.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.089
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it