Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42400186›Full record

ArticleFlorence Nightingale journal of nursing2026

Smoking and Vaping Profiles of Healthcare Workers and Their Knowledge, Attitudes, and Behaviors Regarding Vaping.

Tuğba Bulut, Semra Kocataş

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Florence Nightingale journal of nursing, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

2 authors.

Tuğba BulutDepartment of Public Health Nursing, Dışkapı Yıldırım Beyazıt Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Türkiye.
Semra KocataşDepartment of Nursing, Sivas Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Health Science, Sivas, Türkiye.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis study was conducted to determine the smoking and vaping profiles of healthcare workers and their knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding vaping.

methodsThe sample of this cross-sectional study consisted of 350 healthcare workers, including physicians, nurses, and midwives, working in public hospitals in a province between April 2024 and June 2024. Data were collected using the Personal Information Form and the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence.

resultsIt was determined that 4.6% of the participants both smoked and vaped. More than half of the participants thought that vaping did not have an effect on smoking cessation, and it could lead individuals who never smoked to take up smoking. The smoking rates of the participants who vaped were significantly higher than those who did not vape.

conclusionIt was concluded that healthcare professionals' perceptions of the harmful effects of electronic cigarettes on health are at a good level; however, despite this good perception of harm, their smoking and vaping rates were similar to those of the general public. Cite this article as: Bulut, T., & Kocataş, S. (2026). Smoking and vaping profiles of healthcare workers and their knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors regarding vaping. Florence Nightingale Journal of Nursing, 34, 0415, doi: 10.5152/FNJN.2026.25415.

Identifiers

PMID42400186
PMCPMC13340414

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.