Prevalence of withdrawal symptoms from electronic cigarette cessation: a cross-sectional analysis of the US Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health
Abstract
Electronic cigarette use can produce rapid and high levels of nicotine and thus could produce or maintain a physical dependence on nicotine. No experimental and limited observational studies have tested whether cessation of e-cigarettes is associated with withdrawal symptoms. To examine withdrawal from electronic cigarettes and compare it to that from tobacco cigarettes, we searched the US Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Survey to locate successful and unsuccessful attempts to stop electronic or tobacco cigarettes. We examined electronic cigarette-only users, tobacco cigarette-only users and dual users. A minority of e-cigarette users who stopped/reduced e-cigarettes reported withdrawal symptoms but reported fewer symptoms than tobacco cigarette users who stopped/reduced tobacco cigarettes. E-cigarette withdrawal was not significantly greater in those who tried but were unable to stop e-cigarettes. In dual users, continued tobacco use appeared to reduce e-cigarette withdrawal but the opposite was not true. Given our small sample size and use of retrospective recall, an experimental test of e-cigarette abstinence is needed to better describe the severity of electronic cigarette withdrawal.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Research on e-cigarette withdrawal is limited, but recent analysis of the US Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Survey and a clinical trial indicated that withdrawal symptoms were mild in never smokers.
“There is limited research on withdrawal from e-cigarettes, but recent analysis of the US Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Survey and a clinical trial by the same investgators indicated that withdrawal symptoms were mild in never smokers (Hughes & Callas, 2019; Hughes et al., 2020)”
From Unique, long-term effects of nicotine on adolescent brain. (2020) · cites this paper as Hughes & Callas, 2019
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 15 · Cited by 29
- Authors
- Hughes, J. R., & Callas, P. W.
- Affiliations
- University of Vermont (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hughes, John R.
- Venue
- Addictive Behaviors
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2019-04
- Volume
- 91
- Pages
- 234-237
- ISSN
- 0306-4603 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2879284370
- Cited by
- 29
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4
- FWCI
- 3.09
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Addictive Behaviors (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Cancer Institute (1 R01 CA-192940)
- National Institutes of Health (CA-192940)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
- Keywords
- electronic cigarettes, nicotine withdrawal symptoms, e-cigarette cessation, nicotine dependence, dual use of tobacco and e-cigarettes, smoking cessation, Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health Study
- MeSH terms
- Vaping, Adolescent, Adult, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nicotine, Severity of Illness Index, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, Tobacco Use Disorder, United States, Prevalence, Smoking Cessation, Nicotinic Agonists, Young Adult, Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review