↓ Skip to main content

Regulation profiles of e-cigarettes in the United States: a critical review with qualitative synthesis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medicine, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

wikipedia
2 Wikipedia pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
83 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
Regulation profiles of e-cigarettes in the United States: a critical review with qualitative synthesis
Published in
BMC Medicine, June 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12916-015-0370-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Marie-Claude Tremblay, Pierre Pluye, Genevieve Gore, Vera Granikov, Kristian B. Filion, Mark J. Eisenberg

Abstract

Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have been steadily increasing in popularity since their introduction to US markets in 2007. Debates surrounding the proper regulatory mechanisms needed to mitigate potential harms associated with their use have focused on youth access, their potential for nicotine addiction, and the renormalization of a smoking culture. The objective of this study was to describe the enacted and planned regulations addressing this novel public health concern in the US. We searched LexisNexis Academic under Federal Regulations and Registers, as well as State Administrative Codes and Registers. This same database was also used to find information about planned regulations in secondary sources. The search was restricted to US documents produced between January 1(st), 2004, and July 14(th), 2014. We found two planned regulations at the federal level, and 74 enacted and planned regulations in 44 states. We identified six state-based regulation types, including i) access, ii) usage, iii) marketing and advertisement, iv) packaging, v) taxation, and vi) licensure. These were further classified into 10 restriction subtypes: sales, sale to minors, use in indoor public places, use in limited venues, use by minors, licensure, marketing and advertising, packaging, and taxation. Most enacted restrictions aimed primarily to limit youth access, while few regulations enforced comprehensive restrictions on product use and availability. Current regulations targeting e-cigarettes in the US are varied in nature and scope. There is greater consensus surrounding youth protection (access by minors and/or use by minors, and/or use in limited venues), with little consensus on multi-level regulations, including comprehensive use bans in public spaces.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 83 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 2%
Unknown 81 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 13 16%
Researcher 12 14%
Other 6 7%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 7%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 22 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 20%
Social Sciences 11 13%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 7%
Environmental Science 5 6%
Psychology 4 5%
Other 12 14%
Unknown 28 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 08 November 2015.
All research outputs
#7,463,719
of 22,818,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medicine
#2,593
of 3,427 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#90,833
of 267,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medicine
#65
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,818,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,427 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 43.5. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 267,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.