Global prevalence of heated tobacco product use, 2015–22: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Heated tobacco products (HTPs) are electronic devices that heat process tobacco to release an aerosol containing nicotine and other chemicals. Limited data exist on world-wide HTP use prevalence. This meta-analytic review estimated the prevalence of HTP use by country, World Health Organization (WHO) region, year, sex/gender and age. METHODS: Five databases (Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, PubMed and PsycINFO) were searched between January 2015 and May 2022. Included studies reported the prevalence of HTP use in nationally representative samples post-modern HTP device market entry (2015). A random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate overall prevalence for life-time, current and daily HTP use. RESULTS: Forty-five studies (n = 1 096 076) from 42 countries/areas from the European Region (EUR), Western Pacific Region (WPR), Region of the Americas (AMR) and African Region (AFR) met inclusion criteria. Estimated pooled prevalence for life-time, current and daily HTP use was 4.87% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.16, 5.63], 1.53% (95% CI = 1.22, 1.87) and 0.79% (95% CI = 0.48, 1.18), respectively, across all years (2015-22). Life-time HTP use prevalence significantly increased by 3.39% for WPR [0.52% (95% CI = 0.25, 0.88) in 2015 to 3.91% (95% CI = 2.30, 5.92) in 2019] and 5.58% for EUR [1.13% (95% CI = 0.59, 1.97) in 2016 to 6.98% (95% CI = 5.69, 8.39) in 2020]. Current HTP use increased by 10.45% for WPR [0.12% (95% CI = 0, 0.37) in 2015 to 10.57% (95% CI = 5.59, 16.88) in 2020] and 1.15% for EUR [0% (95% CI = 0, 0.35) in 2016 to 1.15% (95% CI = 0.87, 1.47) in 2020]. Meta-regression revealed higher current HTP use in WPR [3.80% (95% CI = 2.88, 4.98)] compared with EUR [1.40% (95% CI = 1.09, 1.74)] and AMR [0.81% (95% CI = 0.46, 1.26)] and for males [3.45% (95% CI = 2.56, 4.47)] compared with females [1.82% (95% CI = 1.39, 2.29)]. Adolescents had higher life-time HTP use prevalence [5.25% (95% CI = 4.36, 6.21) than adults [2.45% (95% CI = 0.79, 4.97)]. Most studies scored a low risk of sampling bias due to their nationally representative sampling. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of HTPs use increased in the EUR and WPR between 2015 and 2020, with nearly 5% of the included populations having ever tried HTP and 1.5% identifying as current users during the study period.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.015 | 0.043 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".