Electronic cigarette exposures reported to the British Columbia Drug and Poison Information Centre: an observational case series
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDSs), including electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), are rapidly gaining popularity. The aim of this study was to use poison centre data to describe epidemiological trends in ENDS-related exposures. METHODS: We conducted an observational case series study using records containing both coded fields and free-text narratives from the British Columbia Drug and Poison Information Centre for all calls involving exposure to ENDS received from 2012 to 2017. We described trends in exposures and exposed people, as well as clinical effects. RESULTS: A total of 243 calls were recorded for 186 unique exposures to ENDS devices, e-juice, e-cigarette cartridges and other associated paraphernalia over the study period. Calls related to ENDS exposures increased nearly sixfold between 2013 and 2014 and did not decline subsequently. Exposures were most frequently documented in children aged 4 years or less (81 [43.5%]), with 58 (31.0%) in 1- and 2-year-olds. Seventy-two exposures (89%) in children aged 4 years or less were due to accidental ingestion, whereas adults aged 25 years or more called the poison centre following ENDS malfunctions (7 [23%], spills (4 [13%]) and exposure to e-juice mistaken for other substances (4 [13%]). Of the 186 exposed people, 87 (46.8%) reported symptoms. INTERPRETATION: British Columbia experienced a sixfold increase in ENDS-related calls to the provincial poison centre between 2012 and 2017, driven by ingestions in young children. Regulatory approaches aimed at minimizing children's access to ENDS, clear labelling of nicotine concentration, and packaging that reduces the likelihood of spills, product confusion and malfunction should be considered.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".