Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 19, 2025

Comparing the Effects of Electronic Cigarette Vapor and Cigarette Smoke in a Novel In Vivo Exposure System
Published on: May 24, 2017
'E-cigarette smoking' is a misleading term: a critical review of its use in academic literature
Yusuff Adebayo Adebisi1, Nafisat Dasola Jimoh2, Chimwemwe Ngoma3
1College of Social Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK. y.adebisi.1@research.gla.ac.uk.
Abstract:
The terminology used to describe e-cigarette-related behaviours in academic literature is critical for accurate communication and interpretation. Despite fundamental differences between e-cigarette use (vaping) and tobacco smoking, terms such as "e-cigarette smoking" have been used to refer to vaping, potentially conflating the two behaviours. This study aims to assess the use of the term "e-cigarette smoking" and its variants in peer-reviewed literature and discuss the implications of their usage. A review of academic literature published between 2015 and 2024 was conducted using Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and ProQuest databases. Searches included terms such as "e-cigarette smoking" and related variants, with database-specific filters applied to exclude irrelevant document types. A supplementary search in Google Scholar was performed to capture broader usage, including grey literature. The search identified 613 articles in Embase, 462 in Web of Science, 407 in ScienceDirect, 282 in Scopus and 121 in ProQuest, highlighting the widespread use of "e-cigarette smoking" and related terms. The Google Scholar search returned approximately 4680 results, reflecting the widespread and informal use of "e-cigarette smoking" across diverse publication types, including grey literature. The term has also appeared in highly cited and recent studies in ways that conflate e-cigarette use with smoking, obscuring the fundamental differences between these distinct behaviours. The use of "e-cigarette smoking" and its variants in academic literature has notable implications for research integrity, addiction science, public health, and policy. Misleading terminology can contribute to distorted understandings of nicotine dependence, complicate harm reduction strategies, and risk shaping restrictive policies that fail to differentiate e-cigarette use from smoking. Standardising terminology in academic literature is essential to ensure accurate communication, support evidence-based policymaking, and enhance public health initiatives.
More Related Videos
08:39Generation of Electronic Cigarette Aerosol by a Third-Generation Machine-Vaping Device: Application to Toxicological Studies
Published on: August 25, 2018
09:30A Microcontroller Operated Device for the Generation of Liquid Extracts from Conventional Cigarette Smoke and Electronic Cigarette Aerosol
Published on: January 18, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Stimulants
Cocaine can be administered via snorting, injection, or smoking. It primarily functions by blocking the reuptake of dopamine, resulting in a euphoric high characterized by an intense sensation of happiness and...
Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
Statistical Methods for Analyzing Epidemiological Data
Drugs Acting on Autonomic Ganglia: Stimulants
Ganglionic stimulants activate NM nicotinic receptors in autonomic ganglia, falling into two categories: nicotine mimetics [e.g., lobeline, dimethylpiperazine, tetramethylammonium] and muscarinic receptor agonists [e.g., muscarine, methacholine]. The first category's action is rapid and blocked by nicotinic receptor antagonists, while the second category's action is delayed and blocked by atropine-like agents. Nicotine, an alkaloid, affects the heart rate by stimulating...
Observational Studies
There are three types of observational studies – Prospective, retrospective, and cross-sectional.
Prospective Study
Prospective studies, also known as longitudinal or cohort studies, are carried out by collecting future data from groups sharing similar characteristics. One...