ArticleNIHR open research2025
Scoping of Policy Impacts for Regulating E-cigarettes (SPIRE): findings from a data and decision analytic model mapping project.
Article in NIHR open research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Access-related factors and e-cigarette use among 11-17-year-olds: a thematic synthesis of European studies using the five dimensions of access.BMC public health · 2026Pooled it
- Reducing tobacco supplier profits and pricing power: Modelling the impact of a tobacco price cap and tax increase on socioeconomic inequalities in England.Social science & medicine (1982) · 2026Article
- Toxicity and Appeal of Flavoured E-Cigarettes and Flavour Ban Outcomes: A Narrative Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
21 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: E-cigarettes, also known as vapes, are lower risk products compared to conventional cigarettes, that can aid smoking cessation. However, they have been developed to also appeal to people who do not smoke, and are not harm-free. The challenge is for vaping policy to support smokers to quit whilst also protecting non-smokers from starting. Simulation modelling can be used to synthesise existing evidence and make predictions about policy impacts. This research aims to identify (a) data sources that can inform modelling of vape policies in the United Kingdom (UK) and (b) gaps in data that are required to undertake appropriate modelling. Methods: We held stakeholder workshops with academic experts, policy makers and public members to understand the requirements of a simulation model of vaping policy and existing data. Based on the findings of the first workshop and a review of existing modelling studies, we undertook a set of targeted rapid reviews to augment key existing reviews. We also developed a dataset dictionary. From these, we developed key recommendations about data collection and modelling. Results: There is substantial UK evidence around many of the transitions between smoking and vaping behaviours, but these have not yet been estimated simultaneously. We also identified 25 UK studies assessing the socioeconomic, psychological and social network influences on vaping behaviours. However, there is limited evidence about the effectiveness of vaping policies in the UK, the impact of industry circumvention, the health harms of vaping for people who have never smoked, longer term evidence on the smoking harms of vaping and the use and impact of illegal vapes. Conclusions: Addressing the identified gaps in the evidence will require targeted new research. By fostering collaboration across disciplines and ensuring transparency and consistency in modelling, the UK can build a credible, evidence-based foundation for shaping effective vape regulation.
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.