Use of Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems or Cigarette Smoking After US Food and Drug Administration–Prioritized Enforcement Against Fruit-Flavored Cartridges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: The Center for Tobacco Products (CTP) of the US Food and Drug Administration prioritized its enforcement efforts against non-tobacco-, non-menthol- (fruit-) flavored cartridge electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS) in February 2020. Objective: To evaluate adults' use of ENDS and cigarette smoking following the CTP's prioritized enforcement efforts against fruit-flavored cartridge ENDS. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this population-based, nationally representative US cohort study, data were collected from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study from December 2018 to November 2019 (hereafter referred to as 2019) and/or from September 2020 to December 2020 (Adult Telephone Survey, hereafter referred to as 2020). Adults (aged ≥21 years) who used ENDS in the past 30 days and smoked cigarettes in the past 30 days or quit smoking cigarettes in the past year (n = 3173) were evaluated. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2022, to May 2, 2023. Exposure: ENDS flavor-device combinations used. Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcome measures were cross-sectional prevalence of ENDS flavor-device combinations used in 2019 (n = 2654) and 2020 (n = 519) and longitudinal transitions in cigarette smoking (cessation [no smoking in the past 30 days in 2020 among those who smoked in 2019; n = 876] and relapse [smoking in the past 30 days in 2020 among those who recently quit in 2019; n = 137]) as a function of ENDS flavor-device combination used in 2019. Results: The sample in 2019 included 2654 individuals (55% male [95% CI, 53%-58%]). Among those who used ENDS and smoked cigarettes, fruit-flavored cartridge ENDS use decreased from 13.9% (95% CI, 12.1%-15.9%) in 2019 to 7.9% (95% CI, 5.1%-12.1%) in 2020 (P = .01), whereas fruit-flavored disposable ENDS use increased from 4.0% (95% CI, 3.1%-5.1%) in 2019 to 14.5% (95% CI, 11.6%-18.0%) in 2020 (P < .001). Patterns were similar among those who recently quit smoking. Neither cigarette cessation nor relapse rates differed between those who used ENDS that were vs were not prioritized for enforcement efforts (cessation: 23.4% [95% CI, 18.1%-29.7%] vs 26.4% [95% CI, 22.4%-30.8%]; adjusted odds ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.57-2.21; relapse: 32.7% [95% CI, 17.1%-53.4%] vs 29.8% [95% CI, 20.3%-41.3%]; adjusted odds ratio, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.24-3.84). Conclusions and Relevance: In this nationally representative US cohort study of adults who smoked cigarettes and used ENDS, fruit-flavored cartridge ENDS use was nearly halved between 2019 and 2020. Cigarette cessation and relapse rates did not differ between those who used ENDS targeted by CTP and those who used other ENDS.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".