The Impact of Trying Electronic Cigarettes on Cigarette Smoking by College Students: A Prospective Analysis

Introduction:
This text is a prospective analysis of the impact of trying electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) on future cigarette smoking by college students. The study aims to assess the relationship between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking behavior in a sample of smokers enrolled in college.

Key Points:

* The study surveyed first-semester college students at 7 colleges in North Carolina and 4 in Virginia and measured current cigarette smoking at wave 6, which corresponded to fall 2013.
* The study found that 43.5% of the participants had tried e-cigarettes by wave 5, and trying e-cigarettes was a significant predictor of cigarette smoking at wave 6.
* Friends' cigarette smoking and lifetime use of other tobacco products were also associated with cigarette smoking at wave 6.
* The study found no significant differences in baseline characteristics between the analysis sample and the sample with missing data.
* A multiple imputation analysis was conducted, and the results were very similar to the complete case analyses.
* The study found that e-cigarette use at 2 or more waves compared with never use was associated with increased odds of current cigarette smoking at wave 6.
* At wave 6, the most common reason for trying e-cigarettes was curiosity about the product.

Main Message:
The study suggests that trying e-cigarettes during college did not deter cigarette smoking and may have contributed to continued smoking. The study emphasizes the importance of understanding the public health impact of e-cigarettes and the need for more research on the relationship between e-cigarette use and cigarette smoking behavior. The study also highlights the need for regulation of e-cigarettes to protect public health.

Sutfin, Erin L., Beth A Reboussin, Beata Debinski, Kimberly G. Wagoner, John Spangler, and Mark Wolfson. “The Impact of Trying Electronic Cigarettes on Cigarette Smoking by College Students: A Prospective Analysis.” American Journal of Public Health 105, no. 8 (August 2015): e83–89. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2015.302707.