Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 79

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Self-Reported Use of Tobacco, E-cigarettes, and Marijuana Versus Urinary Biomarkers

Boykan, Rachel, Messina, Catherine R., Chateau, Gabriela, Eliscu, Allison, Tolentino, Jonathan, Goniewicz, Maciej L.·2019·Pediatrics
DOI 10.1542/peds.2018-3531
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Surveys have been instrumental in describing adolescent use of tobacco, electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes), and marijuana. However, objective biomarker data are lacking. We compared adolescent self-reported use to urinary biomarkers. Methods From April 2017 to April 2018, adolescents 12 to 21 years old completed an anonymous questionnaire regarding tobacco, e-cigarette, and marijuana use and provided a urine sample. Urine was analyzed for biomarkers cotinine, total 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol, and tetrahydrocannabinolic acid (THCA). Results Of 517 participants, 2.9% reported using tobacco, 14.3% e-cigarettes, and 11.4% marijuana in the past week. Only 2% reporting no smoking had total 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanol levels above cutoff (14.5 pg/mL); 2% of non-e-cigarette users had cotinine above cutoff (10 ng/mL); 2% of those denying marijuana use had THCA above cutoff (10 ng/mL). Daily e-cigarette users showed significantly higher median cotinine than nondaily users (315.4 [interquartile range (IQR) 1375.9] vs 1.69 ng/mL [IQR 28.2]; P 10 ng/mL. Pod users' median cotinine was significantly higher than in nonpod users (259.03 [IQR 1267.69] vs 1.61 ng/mL [IQR 16.3]; P P = .04). Sixty-one percent of those with cotinine >10 ng/mL vs 39% of those with cotinine 10 ng/mL ( P Conclusions Adolescents' self-report correlated with measured urinary biomarkers, but subjects were unaware of their nicotine exposure. More frequent e-cigarette and…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1542/peds.2018-3531

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 79

Metadata

Authors
Boykan, R., Messina, C. R., Chateau, G., Eliscu, A., Tolentino, J., & Goniewicz, M. L.
Venue
Pediatrics
Publisher
American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
Published
2019-04-22
Volume
143
Issue
5
Pages
e20183531
ISSN
  • 0031-4005
  • 1098-4275
DOI
10.1542/peds.2018-3531
Cited by
79
References
40
Language
en

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

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.