Cited by 605Smoking Behavior and CessationCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentIndoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure

Hidden formaldehyde in e-cigarette aerosols

Open access
Jensen, R. Paul, Luo, Wentai, Pankow, James F., Strongin, Robert M., Peyton, David H.·2015·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

This letter reports a chemical analysis of vapor from electronic cigarettes that shows high levels of formaldehyde, a known carcinogen. The authors project that the associated incremental lifetime risk of cancer could be higher than that from long-term smoking.

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 · 10.1056/nejmc1413069

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • The perception that e-cigarettes are less harmful than combustible cigarettes may contribute to their appeal among pregnant persons who have difficulty quitting smoking.

    “The perception that e-cigarettes are less harmful than combustible cigarette smoking may contribute to their appeal among pregnant persons who have difficulty quitting smoking.7,8”

    From Adverse Birth Outcomes Associated With Prepregnancy and Prenatal Electronic Cigarette Use (2021) · cites this paper as [8]

    The paper’s “Hidden Formaldehyde in E-Cigarette Aerosols” section reports formaldehyde exposure from vaping and compares estimated risks with smoking. Searches for pregnancy, perceived harm, appeal, and difficulty quitting found no passage addressing why pregnant persons might choose e-cigarettes. (LLM, conf=0.76)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jensen, R. P., Luo, W., Pankow, J. F., Strongin, R. M., & Peyton, D. H.
Affiliations
Portland State University (US)
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2015-01-22
Volume
372
Issue
4
Pages
392-394
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2053442761
Cited by
605
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 43 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 74 · 2018: 74 · 2017: 75 · 2016: 65 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 1
FWCI
65.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • New England Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PDXScholar (Portland State University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Indoor Air Quality and Microbial Exposure
Keywords
electronic cigarettes, e-cigarette aerosol, formaldehyde, carcinogens, cancer risk, lifetime risk
MeSH terms
Aerosols, Formaldehyde, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy, Risk, Solvents, Propylene Glycol, Particulate Matter, 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