Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Tracking technology changes of e-cigarettes: characteristics and capabilities of new smart vape devices
  1. Adrian Bertrand1,
  2. Megan C Diaz1,
  3. Rebecca Goyette1,
  4. Barbara Schillo1,
  5. Jennifer M Kreslake1,2
  1. 1Truth Initiative Schroeder Institute, Washington, District of Columbia, USA
  2. 2Health, Behavior and Society, Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA
  1. Correspondence to Mr Adrian Bertrand, Truth Initiative Schroeder Institute, Washington, District of Columbia, USA; abertrand{at}truthinitiative.org

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

In the past decade, the electronic cigarette (e-cigarette) market has diversified to include a variety of device types such as customisable mods and tanks and pod-based and disposable devices.1 Disposable e-cigarettes, the most-used tobacco product by US youth and young adults,2 3 have increased in e-liquid capacity and nicotine strength while the price per millilitre of e-liquid has drastically decreased.4

‘Smart vapes’ are a new addition to the expanding array of e-cigarette devices.5 Marketed by e-cigarette manufacturers such as SMOK and iJOY, a key feature of smart vapes is a digital screen that provides information about the device and its usage.5 Although new to the US market, Bluetooth-enabled smart vapes have existed for some time. Leading brands such as JUUL and Vuse introduced these early versions to markets outside the USA in 2019 and 2020, respectively.6 7 Both brands have submitted premarket tobacco applications to the US Food and Drug Administration to market these products in …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • X @MeganCDiaz

  • Collaborators Not Applicable.

  • Contributors AB and MCD conceptualised this study. AB and RG developed the codebook with input from MCD. AB trained the coders and helped resolve coding discrepancies. AB analysed the data. JMK and BS provided supervision and support. AB and RG wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed to editing the manuscript.

  • Funding This project was supported by Truth Initiative.

  • Competing interests No, there are no competing interests.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.