E-cigarette use and intention to initiate or quit smoking among US youths

American Journal of Public Health

Volumn 106, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 672-678

  Park, Ji Yeun ^a   Seo, Dong Chul ^b   Lin, Hsien Chang ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR; BEHAVIOR; ELECTRONIC CIGARETTE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PROCEDURES; PROPENSITY SCORE; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; SMOKING; SMOKING CESSATION; UNITED STATES; UTILIZATION;

ADOLESCENT; ADOLESCENT BEHAVIOR; ELECTRONIC CIGARETTES; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTENTION; MALE; PROPENSITY SCORE; SMOKING; SMOKING CESSATION; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84961618746     PISSN: 00900036     EISSN: 15410048     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2015.302994     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Johnston LD, O'Malley PM, Bachman JG, Schulenberg JE, Miech RA. Monitoring the Future. National Survey Results on Adolescent Drug Use: 1975-2014. 2014 Overview. Key Findings on Adolescent Drug Use. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Institute for Social Research; 2015.
2. Bunnell RE, Agaku IT, Arrazola RA, et al. Intentions to smoke cigarettes among never-smoking US middle and high school electronic cigarette users: National Youth Tobacco Survey, 2011-2013. Nicotine Tob Res. 2015;17 (2):228-235.
3. Polosa R, Caponnetto P, Morjaria JB, Papale G, Campagna D, Russo C. Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e-cigarette) on smoking reduction and cessation: a prospective 6-month pilot study. BMC Public Health. 2011;11:786.
4. Siegel MB, Tanwar KL, Wood KS. Electronic cigarettes as a smoking-cessation: tool results from an online survey. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40(4): 472-475.
5. Bullen C, McRobbie H, Thornley S, Glover M, Lin R, Laugesen M. Effect of an electronic nicotine delivery device (e cigarette) on desire to smoke and withdrawal, user preferences and nicotine delivery: randomised cross-over trial. Tob Control. 2010;19(2): 98-103.
6. Grana RA, Popova L, Ling PM. A longitudinal analysis of electronic cigarette use and smoking cessation. JAMA Intern Med. 2014;174(5):812-813.
7. Sutfin EL, McCoy TP, Morrell HE, Hoeppner BB, Wolfson M. Electronic cigarette use by college students. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013;131(3):214-221.
8. D'Agostino RB Jr. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a nonrandomized control group. Stat Med. 1998;17(19): 2265-2281.
9. Becker SO, Ichino A. Estimation of average treatment effects based on propensity scores. Stata J. 2002;2(4): 358-377.
10. Choi WS, Pierce JP, Gilpin EA, Farkas AJ, Berry CC. Which adolescent experimenters progress to established smoking in the United States. Am J Prev Med. 1997;13(5): 385-391.
11. Regan AK, Promoff G, Dube SR, Arrazola R. Electronic nicotine delivery systems: adult use and awareness of the 'e-cigarette' in the USA. Tob Control. 2013;22(1):19-23.
12. Ambrose BK, Rostron BL, Johnson SE, et al. Perceptions of the relative harm of cigarettes and e-cigarettes among U.S. youth. Am J Prev Med. 2014;47(2, suppl 1): S53-S60.
13. Bullen C, Howe C, Laugesen M, et al. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2013;382(9905):1629-1637.
14. Rosenbaum RR. Observational Studies. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 2002.
15. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika. 1983;70(1):41-55.
16. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. Constructing a control group using multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score. Am Stat. 1985;39(1): 33-38.
17. Austin PC. An introduction to propensity score methods for reducing the effects of confounding in observational studies. Multivariate Behav Res. 2011;46(3): 399-424.
18. Grinstein-Weiss M, Manturuk KR, Guo S, Charles P, Key C. The impact of homeownership on marriage and divorce: evidence from propensity score matching. Soc Work Res. 2014;38(2):73-90.
19. Gu XS, Rosenbaum PR. Comparison of multivariate matching methods: structures, distances, and algorithms. J Comput Graph Stat. 1993;2(4):405-420.
20. Haviland A, Nagin DS, Rosenbaum PR. Combining propensity score matching and group-based trajectory analysis in an observational study. Psychol Methods. 2007; 12(3):247-267.
21. Guo S. IMBALANCE: Stata module to check co-variate imbalance before and after Matching. 2008. Available at: http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s457043.html. Accessed February 20, 2015.
22. Spring B, Moller AC, Coons MJ. Multiple health behaviours: overview and implications. J Public Health (Oxf). 2012;34(suppl 1):i3-i10.
23. Brener ND, Collins JL. Co-occurrence of health-risk behaviors among adolescents in the United States. J Adolesc Health. 1998;22(3):209-213.
24. DuRant RH, Smith JA, Kreiter SR, Krowchuk DP. The relationship between early age of onset of initial substance use and engaging in multiple health risk behaviors among young adolescents. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 1999;153(3):286-291.
25. Kinnunen JM, Ollila H, El-Amin SE, Pere LA, Lindfors PL, Rimpela AH. Awareness and determinants of electronic cigarette use among Finnish adolescents in 2013: a population-based study. Tob Control. 2014;Epub ahead of print.
26. Pennanen M, Haukkala A, de Vries H, Vartiainen E. Longitudinal study of relations between school achievement and smoking behavior among secondary school students in Finland: results of the ESFA study. Subst Use Misuse. 2011;46(5):569-579.
27. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. State laws prohibiting sales to minors and indoor use of electronic nicotine delivery systems-United States, November 2014. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014;63 (49):1145-1150.
28. Cordato R, Curry S. North Carolina's e-cigarette tax: where bad tax policy meets special interest politics. 2014. Available at: http://www.johnlocke.org/acrobat/spotlights/Spotlight456ECigaretteTaxes.pdf Accessed March 10, 2015.
29. US Public Health Service, Office of the Surgeon General; US National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office on Smoking and Health. Preventing Tobacco Use Among Youth and Young Adults: A Report of the Surgeon General. Rockville, MD: US Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service; 2012.
30. Etter JF, Bullen C. Electronic cigarette: users profile, utilization, satisfaction and perceived efficacy. Addiction. 2011;106(11):2017-2028.
31. Ayers JW, Ribisl KM, Brownstein JS. Tracking the rise in popularity of electronic nicotine delivery systems (electronic cigarettes) using search query surveillance. Am J Prev Med. 2011;40(4):448-453.
32. Tan AS, Bigman CA. E-cigarette awareness and perceived harmfulness: prevalence and associations with smoking-cessation outcomes. Am J Prev Med. 2014;47(2): 141-149.
33. Luo C, Zheng X, Zeng DD, Leischow S. Portrayal of electronic cigarettes on YouTube. BMC Public Health. 2014;14:1028.
34. Paek HJ, Kim S, Hove T, Huh JY. Reduced harm or another gateway to smoking? Source, message, and information characteristics of e-cigarette videos on YouTube. J Health Commun. 2014;19(5):545-560.
35. Callahan-Lyon P. Electronic cigarettes: human health effects. Tob Control. 2014;23(suppl 2):ii36-ii40.
36. Trtchounian A, Williams M, Talbot P. Conventional and electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have different smoking characteristics. Nicotine Tob Res. 2010;12(9): 905-912.
37. Yang D, Small DS, Silber JH, Rosenbaum PR. Optimal matching with minimal deviation from fine balance in a study of obesity and surgical outcomes. Biometrics. 2012;68(2):628-636.
38. Olitsky NH. How do academic achievement and gender affect the earnings of STEM majors? A propensity score matching approach. Res Higher Educ. 2014;55(3): 245-271.
39. Heckman JJ, Ichimura H, Todd PE. Matching as an econometric evaluation estimator: evidence from eval uating a job training programme. Rev Econ Stud. 1997;64 (4):605-654.
40. Caliendo M, Kopeinig S. Some practical guidance for the implementation of propensity score matching. J Econ Surv. 2008;22(1):31-72.