↓ Skip to main content

Perceived efficacy of e-cigarettes versus nicotine replacement therapy among successful e-cigarette users: a qualitative approach

Overview of attention for article published in Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, March 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#17 of 316)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (95th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
14 tweeters
facebook
3 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page
googleplus
2 Google+ users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
143 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
292 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Perceived efficacy of e-cigarettes versus nicotine replacement therapy among successful e-cigarette users: a qualitative approach
Published in
Addiction Science & Clinical Practice, March 2013
DOI 10.1186/1940-0640-8-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Amanda M Barbeau, Jennifer Burda, Michael Siegel

Abstract

Nicotine is widely recognized as an addictive psychoactive drug. Since most smokers are bio-behaviorally addicted, quitting can be very difficult and is often accompanied by withdrawal symptoms. Research indicates that nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) can double quit rates. However, the success rate for quitting remains low. E-cigarettes (electronic cigarettes) are battery-powered nicotine delivery devices used to inhale doses of vaporized nicotine from a handheld device similar in shape to a cigarette without the harmful chemicals present in tobacco products. Anecdotal evidence strongly suggests that e-cigarettes may be effective in helping smokers quit and preventing relapse, but there have been few published qualitative studies, especially among successful e-cigarette users, to support this evidence.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 292 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 4 1%
United Kingdom 2 <1%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Malaysia 1 <1%
Unknown 283 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 60 21%
Student > Master 42 14%
Researcher 33 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 30 10%
Other 22 8%
Other 74 25%
Unknown 31 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 76 26%
Psychology 46 16%
Social Sciences 28 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 17 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 12 4%
Other 71 24%
Unknown 42 14%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 37. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 February 2020.
All research outputs
#670,960
of 17,353,889 outputs
Outputs from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#17
of 316 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,142
of 139,302 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Addiction Science & Clinical Practice
#1
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 17,353,889 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 316 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 139,302 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them