Do China's e-cigarette control policies work? A decade-long analysis of public discourse using an AI-integrated mixed-methods approach.

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Tobacco Induced Diseases Pub Date : 2025-09-26 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.18332/tid/208810
Zhangyan Li, Xinrui Wang, Xingye Yao, Yu Chen
{"title":"Do China's e-cigarette control policies work? A decade-long analysis of public discourse using an AI-integrated mixed-methods approach.","authors":"Zhangyan Li, Xinrui Wang, Xingye Yao, Yu Chen","doi":"10.18332/tid/208810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>China, the world's largest tobacco market, has raised concerns due to e-cigarettes' health risks and rising youth usage. Despite a decade of regulatory policies, their effectiveness remains uncertain. This study examines trends in e-cigarette discourse on Weibo (2016-2025), analyzing discussion volume shifts and the impact of various topics on public engagement.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This study employs a hybrid computational approach integrating topic modeling, LLM-assisted annotation, and quantitative analysis to examine the evolution of e-cigarette discussions on Weibo (2015-2025) and topic dissemination effects (n=129769). LDA modeling identify 10 topics, followed by DeepSeek-V3-assisted classification. Linear regression in SPSS analyzed relationships between topic categories and social media engagement metrics (reposts/comments/likes) at 95% confidence intervals.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Findings reveal 2020 as a key year of change: pro-vaping posts declined while anti-vaping content increased. Despite reduced volume, pro-vaping material maintained significant digital influence. Pre-policy, marketing content (p<0.01), health effects (p<0.01) and regulation (p<0.01) drove engagement. Post-policy, marketing lost engagement impact, while 'user experience' posts gained traction, significantly correlating with all interactions (all p<0.05). This indicates regulations were less effective against user-generated content, with pro-vaping messaging shifting towards peer-driven channels. Crucially, influencers consistently triggered strong engagement throughout the period (p<0.01) despite lower post volume, remaining key discourse drivers.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Although China is strengthening its control over e-cigarettes, the results of our study indicate that this control remains limited. We advocate for more robust regulation of social media content, particularly concerning the management of celebrities and influencers, as well as the sharing of e-cigarette use experiences. However, the current regulatory framework enforced by the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration has proven inadequate for widespread and effective governance. We suggest that regulatory authority be shared with public health agencies in order to better integrate e-cigarette regulation with broader public health objectives.</p>","PeriodicalId":23202,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Induced Diseases","volume":"23 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12465113/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Induced Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18332/tid/208810","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: China, the world's largest tobacco market, has raised concerns due to e-cigarettes' health risks and rising youth usage. Despite a decade of regulatory policies, their effectiveness remains uncertain. This study examines trends in e-cigarette discourse on Weibo (2016-2025), analyzing discussion volume shifts and the impact of various topics on public engagement.

Methods: This study employs a hybrid computational approach integrating topic modeling, LLM-assisted annotation, and quantitative analysis to examine the evolution of e-cigarette discussions on Weibo (2015-2025) and topic dissemination effects (n=129769). LDA modeling identify 10 topics, followed by DeepSeek-V3-assisted classification. Linear regression in SPSS analyzed relationships between topic categories and social media engagement metrics (reposts/comments/likes) at 95% confidence intervals.

Results: Findings reveal 2020 as a key year of change: pro-vaping posts declined while anti-vaping content increased. Despite reduced volume, pro-vaping material maintained significant digital influence. Pre-policy, marketing content (p<0.01), health effects (p<0.01) and regulation (p<0.01) drove engagement. Post-policy, marketing lost engagement impact, while 'user experience' posts gained traction, significantly correlating with all interactions (all p<0.05). This indicates regulations were less effective against user-generated content, with pro-vaping messaging shifting towards peer-driven channels. Crucially, influencers consistently triggered strong engagement throughout the period (p<0.01) despite lower post volume, remaining key discourse drivers.

Conclusions: Although China is strengthening its control over e-cigarettes, the results of our study indicate that this control remains limited. We advocate for more robust regulation of social media content, particularly concerning the management of celebrities and influencers, as well as the sharing of e-cigarette use experiences. However, the current regulatory framework enforced by the State Tobacco Monopoly Administration has proven inadequate for widespread and effective governance. We suggest that regulatory authority be shared with public health agencies in order to better integrate e-cigarette regulation with broader public health objectives.

中国的电子烟管制政策有效吗?使用人工智能集成混合方法对公共话语进行长达十年的分析。
导言:中国是世界上最大的烟草市场,由于电子烟的健康风险和年轻人使用量的增加,中国引起了人们的关注。尽管出台了十年的监管政策,但其有效性仍不确定。本研究考察了微博上电子烟话语的趋势(2016-2025),分析了讨论量的变化以及各种话题对公众参与的影响。方法:本研究采用主题建模、llm辅助注释和定量分析相结合的混合计算方法,研究微博上电子烟讨论的演变(2015-2025)和话题传播效果(n=129769)。LDA建模识别10个主题,然后进行deepseek - v3辅助分类。SPSS的线性回归分析了主题类别和社交媒体参与指标(转发/评论/喜欢)之间在95%置信区间的关系。结果:调查结果显示,2020年是关键的一年:支持电子烟的帖子减少了,而反电子烟的内容增加了。尽管数量减少了,但支持电子烟的材料仍保持着显著的数字影响力。结论:尽管中国正在加强对电子烟的控制,但我们的研究结果表明,这种控制仍然有限。我们主张加强对社交媒体内容的监管,特别是对名人和网红的管理,以及对电子烟使用经验的分享。然而,目前由国家烟草专卖局执行的监管框架已被证明不足以实现广泛和有效的治理。我们建议与公共卫生机构共享监管权力,以便更好地将电子烟监管与更广泛的公共卫生目标结合起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Tobacco Induced Diseases
Tobacco Induced Diseases SUBSTANCE ABUSE-PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
5.40%
发文量
95
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: Tobacco Induced Diseases encompasses all aspects of research related to the prevention and control of tobacco use at a global level. Preventing diseases attributable to tobacco is only one aspect of the journal, whose overall scope is to provide a forum for the publication of research articles that can contribute to reducing the burden of tobacco induced diseases globally. To address this epidemic we believe that there must be an avenue for the publication of research/policy activities on tobacco control initiatives that may be very important at a regional and national level. This approach provides a very important "hands on" service to the tobacco control community at a global scale - as common problems have common solutions. Hence, we see ourselves as "connectors" within this global community. The journal hence encourages the submission of articles from all medical, biological and psychosocial disciplines, ranging from medical and dental clinicians, through health professionals to basic biomedical and clinical scientists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信