ArticleInternal and emergency medicine2025
Comparing self-rated health among exclusive e-cigarette users and traditional cigarette smokers: an analysis of the Health Survey for England 2019.
Article in Internal and emergency medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cigarette smoking, e-cigarette use, and hypertension: a population-based cross-sectional study.Journal of human hypertension · 2026Article
- Time since cigarette smoking cessation and self-rated health among exclusive e-cigarette users.Irish journal of medical science · 2026Article
- Prescribed Medication Burden by Tobacco Smoking and E-Cigarette Use Status.Health science reports · 2026Article
- Loneliness and E-cigarette Use Among Adolescents in England: Evidence From the Smoking, Drinking and Drug Use Survey 2023.Journal of preventive medicine and public health = Yebang Uihakhoe chi · 2026Article
- Associations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease with life satisfaction and self-rated health: quantifying the subjective burden in a population-based study.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- Predictors of health perceptions and health-promoting behaviors among Turkish prisoners: a cross-sectional study.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Differences in respiratory wheezing between current exclusive e-cigarette users, current exclusive cigarette smokers, and never users of either product: findings from a population-based study.Harm reduction journal · 2025Article
- 'E-cigarette smoking' is a misleading term: a critical review of its use in academic literature.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Review
- Association between household secondhand tobacco smoke exposure and regular e-cigarette use among adolescents: evidence from a national school-based survey.European journal of public health · 2025Article
- Predictors of e-cigarette use among individuals with asthma: findings from a cross-sectional population-based study.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- When meta-analysis misleads: the need for methodological integrity in e-cigarette research.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Self-rated health differences between exclusive e-cigarette users and exclusive cigarette smokers: evidence from the 2017-2019 Scottish Health Survey.Internal and emergency medicine · 2025Article
- Multidimensional analysis of conventional and electronic cigarette consumption among students.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The health implications of e-cigarette use compared to traditional cigarette smoking continue to attract significant public health interest. This study examines self-rated health (SRH) outcomes among exclusive e-cigarette users versus exclusive traditional cigarette smokers, using data from the Health Survey for England 2019. From an initial sample of 10,299 participants, the study focused on 8204 adults, excluding those aged 0-15. Further refinement to exclusive nicotine product users led to 274 e-cigarette users and 1017 cigarette smokers, after excluding dual users, never users, ex-users, non-responders, and users of other tobacco products such as pipes and cigars. SRH was derived from participants' responses to a question asking how they rated their general health, with five possible options: "very good", "good", "fair", "bad", and "very bad". For the purposes of this study, these responses were collapsed into two categories: "Good Health" (combining "very good" and "good") and "Poor Health" (combining "fair", "bad", and "very bad"). Consequently, 834 participants were classified as reporting good health, while 457 reported poor health. Binary logistic regression, adjusted for factors such as age, sex, ethnicity, residence, education, body mass index, alcohol use, age started smoking, physical or mental health conditions, and frequency of GP visits, revealed that exclusive e-cigarette users were significantly more likely to report good health compared to exclusive cigarette smokers, with an odds ratio (OR) of 1.59 (95% CI: 1.10 - 2.32, p = 0.014). As a sensitivity analysis, a generalized ordered logistic regression model was performed using the original five SRH categories. The adjusted model confirmed consistent results, with exclusive e-cigarette users showing higher odds of reporting better health across the full range of SRH outcomes (OR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.08-1.82, p = 0.011). These findings suggest that exclusive e-cigarette users perceive their health more positively than traditional cigarette smokers, contributing useful insights to the discussions around harm reduction strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.