Division of Social and Behavioral Health/Health Administration and Policy, School of Community Health Sciences, University of Nevada, Reno, NV.
Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD.
Nicotine Tob Res. 2020 Apr 21;22(5):848-852. doi: 10.1093/ntr/nty223.
A diverse class of products, "e-cigarettes" present surveillance and regulatory challenges because of nonstandard terminology used to describe subtypes, especially among young adults, where occasional e-cig use is most prevalent.
Young adults (n = 3364) in wave 9 (Spring 2016) of the Truth Initiative Young Adult Cohort were randomized to see two of five photos of common e-cig products (three varieties of first-generation e-cigs and one variety each of second- and third-generation e-cigs). Qualitative responses were coded into nine classifications: "e-cigarette, e-hookah, vape-related, mod, other or more than one kind of e-cig, marijuana-related, non-e-cig tobacco product, misidentified, and don't know." We characterized the sample and survey responses and conducted multivariable logistic regression to identify participant characteristics associated with correctly identifying the devices as e-cigs. Data were weighted to represent the young adult population in the United States in 2016.
The majority of participants identified the pictured devices as some type of e-cig (57.7%-83.6%). The white first-generation e-cig, as well as the second- and third-generation e-cigs caused the greatest confusion, with a large proportion of individuals responding "don't know" (12.2%-25.1%, depending on device) or misidentifying the e-cig as a non-nicotine product (3.4%-16.1%, depending on device) or non-e-cig tobacco product (1.4%-14.6%, depending on device).
Accurate surveillance and analyses of the effect of e-cigs on health behavior and outcomes depend on accurate data collection on users' subtype of e-cig. Carefully chosen images in surveys may improve reporting of e-cig use in population studies.
Survey researchers using images to cue respondents, especially young adult respondents, should consider avoiding use of white or colorful first-generation e-cigs, which were commonly misidentified in this research, in preference for black or dark colored first-generation e-cigs, such as the blu brand e-cig. Given the sizable proportion of respondents who classified second- and third-generation e-cigs with terminology related to vaping, surveys specifically aimed at assessing use of these types of e-cigs should include the term "vape" when describing this subclass of devices.
“电子烟”是一类多样化的产品，由于其用于描述子类别的术语不标准，尤其是在偶尔使用电子烟最为普遍的年轻成年人中，给监测和监管带来了挑战。
Truth Initiative 青年队列的第 9 波（2016 年春季）的青年成年人（n=3364）被随机分配到两种共五种常见电子烟产品的图片中（三种第一代电子烟和一种第二代和第三代电子烟）。定性反应被编码为九种分类：“电子烟、e-水烟、与 vaping 相关的、改装、其他或多种电子烟、与大麻相关的、非电子烟烟草产品、识别错误、不知道”。我们描述了样本和调查反应，并进行了多变量逻辑回归分析，以确定与正确识别设备为电子烟相关的参与者特征。数据经过加权处理，以代表 2016 年美国的青年成年人人口。
大多数参与者将图片中的设备识别为某种类型的电子烟（57.7%-83.6%）。白色第一代电子烟，以及第二代和第三代电子烟引起了最大的混淆，很大一部分人回答“不知道”（12.2%-25.1%，取决于设备）或错误地将电子烟识别为非尼古丁产品（3.4%-16.1%，取决于设备）或非电子烟烟草产品（1.4%-14.6%，取决于设备）。
对电子烟对健康行为和结果的影响进行准确的监测和分析取决于对用户电子烟子类型的准确数据收集。在调查中精心选择的图片可能会改善人群研究中电子烟使用情况的报告。
使用图像提示受访者的调查研究人员，尤其是年轻成年人受访者，应考虑避免在研究中使用白色或彩色的第一代电子烟，因为这些电子烟在本研究中经常被错误识别，而应优先选择黑色或深色的第一代电子烟，如 blu 品牌电子烟。鉴于相当一部分受访者使用与 vaping 相关的术语来分类第二代和第三代电子烟，专门用于评估这些类型电子烟使用情况的调查应该在描述这类设备时包括“vape”一词。
