4.4 Article

E-cigarette use and intentions related to psychological distress among cigarette, e-cigarette, and cannabis vape users during the start of the COVID-19 pandemic

Journal

BMC PSYCHOLOGY
Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

SPRINGERNATURE
DOI: 10.1186/s40359-022-00910-9

Keywords

Smoking; E-cigarette use; Cannabis use; Psychological distress; Intentions to use e-cigarettes

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study found associations between psychological distress and cigarette smoking, e-cigarette use, and intentions to use e-cigarettes. Current e-cigarette use and cannabis vaping were higher among females, potentially due to higher psychological distress reported by females. There were interactions between intentions to use e-cigarettes and psychological distress variables for all smoking and vaping behaviors.
Background This study examines associations between psychological distress, intentions to use e-cigarettes, and cigarette smoking, e-cigarette use, and cannabis consumption through e-cigarette use among a diverse sample of U.S. young adults. Procedures Young adults (N = 314; 72.5% female) were recruited to complete an online survey during the first few months of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results Associations between psychological distress and cigarette smoking, e-cigarette use, cannabis vaping, and intentions to use e-cigarettes were found. Current e-cigarette use (OR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.17, 1.28, p < .001; 7.5%) and cannabis vaping (OR = 2.03, 95% CI 1.88, 2.18, p < .001; 10%) was higher among female, possibly due to the significantly higher psychological distress reported among females. Interactions between intentions to use e-cigarettes and psychological distress variables were found for all smoking and vaping behaviors. Conclusions Public health efforts should increase focus on providing psychological services for young adults to improve coping strategies that are alternative to smoking and vaping behaviors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available