Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 509

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

“Smoking Revolution”

Open access
Grana, Rachel A., Ling, Pamela M.·2014·American Journal of Preventive Medicine

Abstract

Background Electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) have been increasingly available and marketed in the U.S. since 2007. As patterns of product adoption are frequently driven and reinforced by marketing, it is important to understand the marketing claims encountered by consumers. Purpose To describe the main advertising claims made on branded e-cigarette retail websites. Methods Websites were retrieved from two major search engines in 2011 using iterative searches with the following terms: electronic cigarette, e-cigarette, e-cig, and personal vaporizer. Fifty-nine websites met inclusion criteria, and 13 marketing claims were coded for main marketing messages in 2012. Results Ninety-five percent of the websites made explicit or implicit health-related claims, 64% had a smoking cessation-related claim, 22% featured doctors, and 76% claimed that the product does not produce secondhand smoke. Comparisons to cigarettes included claims that e-cigarettes were cleaner (95%) and cheaper (93%). Eighty-eight percent stated that the product could be smoked anywhere and 71% mentioned using the product to circumvent clean air policies. Candy, fruit, and coffee flavors were offered on most sites. Youthful appeals included images or claims of modernity (73%), increased social status (44%), enhanced social activity (32%), romance (31%), and use by celebrities (22%). Conclusions Health claims and smoking cessation messages that are unsupported by current scientific evidence are frequently used to sell e-cigarettes. Implied and overt health claims, the presence of doctors on websites, celebrity endorsements, and the use of characterizing flavors should be prohibited.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amepre.2013.12.010

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 509

Metadata

Authors
Grana, R. A., & Ling, P. M.
Venue
American Journal of Preventive Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-04
Volume
46
Issue
4
Pages
395-403
ISSN
0749-3797 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W48624414
Cited by
509
References
1
FWCI
47.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: “Smoking Revolution”. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.12.010
The paper
Grana, R. A., & Ling, P. M. (2014). “Smoking Revolution”. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2013.12.010

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.