Prospective associations of subjective and objective neighborhood disadvantage with cannabis and nicotine vaping among Southern California adolescents.

Danyi Li, Sandrah P Eckel, Louisiana M Sanchez, Mary Ann Pentz, Alyssa F Harlow

Abstract read

In one paragraph

Article in Health & place, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it

0cells of the map it votes in

0citing papers in PubMed

–field-weighted citation impact

1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Danyi LiDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90032, USA.

Sandrah P EckelDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90032, USA.

Louisiana M SanchezDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90032, USA.

Mary Ann PentzDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90032, USA.

Alyssa F HarlowDepartment of Population and Public Health Sciences, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90032, USA; Institute for Addiction Science, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, 90032, USA. Electronic address: afharlow@usc.edu.

Funding

The Tobacco and Cannabis Retail Environment, Neighborhood Disadvantage, and Adolescent VapingK01DA058084 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI Alyssa Fitzpatrick Harlow · 2023 to 2026

$752k

NIDA NIH HHS K01 DA058084

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cannabis and nicotine vaping are common among adolescents and associated with mental, physical, and behavioral health issues. Neighborhood disadvantage is an important determinant of health and may impact adolescent substance use, but its impact on vaping outcomes is poorly understood. This study examined the independent and joint association of subjective (i.e., perceived) and objective (i.e., census-derived) neighborhood disadvantage with nicotine and cannabis vaping using five semi-annual waves (2022-2024) of a prospective cohort of Southern California high school students (n = 3278; baseline mean age = 15.7 years). Mixed-effects modified Poisson models examined associations of subjective neighborhood disorder scale (NDS) and objective census-derived area deprivation index (ADI) at baseline with repeated measures of current (past-30-day) cannabis and nicotine vaping over five follow-up waves, adjusting for individual-level sociodemographic factors. There was a positive weak correlation between NDS and ADI scores (Pearson's r = 0.27). Higher NDS scores (i.e., subjective disadvantage) were positively associated with risk of cannabis (Risk Ratio, RR = 1.04, 95 %CI: 1.02-1.06) and nicotine (RR = 1.04, 95 %CI: 1.01-1.06) vaping. There was no independent association between ADI score (i.e., objective disadvantage) and vaping outcomes. Compared to youth with both low NDS and low ADI scores, risk of nicotine vaping was elevated for youth with both high NDS and high ADI scores (RR = 1.73, 95 %CI: 1.07-2.81); cannabis vaping was elevated for youth with high NDS scores and low ADI scores (RR = 2.04, 95 %CI: 1.43-2.13). Findings suggest that subjective neighborhood perceptions may be more impactful measures of neighborhood disadvantage than objective census indicators for associations with youth vaping of either cannabis or nicotine.

Indexed as

Neighborhood CharacteristicsNicotineResidence CharacteristicsVapingAdolescentCaliforniaCannabisFemaleHumansMaleMarijuana SmokingProspective StudiesNicotineAdolescentsCannabis vapingE-cigaretteNeighborhood deprivationNeighborhood disadvantageNeighborhood disorderNicotine vaping

Identifiers

PMID41187413

DOI10.1016/j.healthplace.2025.103577

PMCPMC12751403

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata

LicenceTDM

Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.