MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407953730 · doi:10.1136/tc-2024-058798

Vaping cessation interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4407953730 on OpenAlexaff
Javad Heshmati, Avinash Pandey, Joseph Benjamen, Muhammad Furqan, Muhammad Salman, Sarah Visintini, Kerri A. Mullen, Andrew Pipe, Hassan Mir

Bibliographic record

VenueTobacco Control · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmoking cessationMedicineAbstinencePsychological interventionMEDLINEMeta-analysisOdds ratioRandomized controlled trialCotinineNicotinePsychiatryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDS), such as e-cigarettes, have surged in popularity. While long-term risks remain unclear, known dangers include nicotine addiction, E-cigarette or Vaping Use-Associated Lung Injury and potential extrapulmonary effects on the heart, immune system and neurodevelopment. Addressing ENDS addiction may require strategies akin to smoking cessation. However, evidence is lacking; there are no currently approved vaping-cessation aids. The objective of this review is to summarise the available literature addressing interventions for vaping cessation. DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION: A librarian-assisted search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus, as well as preprints in Europe PMC, Open Science Framework, and the grey literature searches until January 2024. Six included studies used self-report methods to determine the abstinence rate, while one study used cotinine-level-verified self-reported abstinence. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that examine 'rates of vaping cessation' outcomes. An intention-to-treat approach was used for data extraction, and random-effects meta-analyses models were applied. DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven RCTs were included, which studied pharmacological therapy, digital interventions and/or educational content. The primary meta-analyses demonstrated a statistically significant increase in the odds of achieving 7-day point prevalence abstinence (PPA) (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.01, number of participants=3244, moderate-certainty) and continuous abstinence (OR 2.71, 95% CI 1.31 to 5.61, number of participants=164, low-certainty) following intervention. A non-significant increase in odds was noted at 30-day PPA (OR 1.32, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.42, number of participants=1994, very low certainty). CONCLUSIONS: Vaping cessation interventions increase 7-day PPA rates at 1-12 months follow-up and this was consistent across prespecified subgroup analyses of the intervention type, outcome and duration of follow-up. More high-quality studies with reproducible findings are needed to enhance the certainty of the evidence and guide clinical interventions. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022383670.

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 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)0.001
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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.646
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.292 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTobacco ControlSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207