A mixed-methods analysis of a do-it-yourself e-cigarette community on Reddit.

IF 2.3 Q3 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Tobacco Prevention & Cessation Pub Date : 2025-12-11 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.18332/tpc/211846
Arpita Tripathi, Kar-Hai Chu
{"title":"A mixed-methods analysis of a do-it-yourself e-cigarette community on Reddit.","authors":"Arpita Tripathi, Kar-Hai Chu","doi":"10.18332/tpc/211846","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Flavored e-cigarette use among US youth remains prevalent, prompting regulatory action by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On 2 January 2020, the FDA announced a federal ban on flavored e-cigarettes, which may be circumvented through unregulated do-it-yourself (DIY) methods shared in online communities. Understanding discourse within these communities is essential to understanding unintended policy effects. This study's primary aim was to describe discourse in a DIY e-cigarette subreddit, with a secondary aim of examining how discussions shifted following the 2020 flavor ban.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a mixed-methods study of posts from the subreddit r/DIY_eJuice, an online community focused on DIY e-liquid mixing. A total of 5110 posts were extracted between January 2019 and January 2021, with posts before 2 January 2020 defined as the pre-ban period and those after as the post-ban period. From this dataset, we randomly selected 800 posts (17% of the total; 400 pre-ban and 400 post-ban), which were coded by three trained human coders using a systematically developed codebook with 12 thematic categories. Chi-squared tests were applied to compare thematic distributions between periods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>DIY mixing methods (76%, n=605) and discussions about flavors (49%, n=390) were the most frequent topics across both periods, despite the flavor ban. Policy-related discussions significantly increased from 3.5% (n=14) pre-ban to 8.3% (n=33) post-ban (p=0.004). Posts related to safety concerns remained infrequent in both pre- and post-ban period. The proportion of beginner users was constant at 22% across both periods (n=90 at pre-ban, and n=88 at post-ban), while discussions by experienced users increased from 35.3% (n=141) to 41.5% (n=166).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Regulatory action on flavored e-cigarettes influenced community discourse, increasing conversations about policy and DIY mixing techniques, but not significantly affecting discussions of safety. Continued surveillance of DIY communities is necessary to inform future public health strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":44546,"journal":{"name":"Tobacco Prevention & Cessation","volume":"11 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12699440/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tobacco Prevention & Cessation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18332/tpc/211846","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Flavored e-cigarette use among US youth remains prevalent, prompting regulatory action by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). On 2 January 2020, the FDA announced a federal ban on flavored e-cigarettes, which may be circumvented through unregulated do-it-yourself (DIY) methods shared in online communities. Understanding discourse within these communities is essential to understanding unintended policy effects. This study's primary aim was to describe discourse in a DIY e-cigarette subreddit, with a secondary aim of examining how discussions shifted following the 2020 flavor ban.

Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study of posts from the subreddit r/DIY_eJuice, an online community focused on DIY e-liquid mixing. A total of 5110 posts were extracted between January 2019 and January 2021, with posts before 2 January 2020 defined as the pre-ban period and those after as the post-ban period. From this dataset, we randomly selected 800 posts (17% of the total; 400 pre-ban and 400 post-ban), which were coded by three trained human coders using a systematically developed codebook with 12 thematic categories. Chi-squared tests were applied to compare thematic distributions between periods.

Results: DIY mixing methods (76%, n=605) and discussions about flavors (49%, n=390) were the most frequent topics across both periods, despite the flavor ban. Policy-related discussions significantly increased from 3.5% (n=14) pre-ban to 8.3% (n=33) post-ban (p=0.004). Posts related to safety concerns remained infrequent in both pre- and post-ban period. The proportion of beginner users was constant at 22% across both periods (n=90 at pre-ban, and n=88 at post-ban), while discussions by experienced users increased from 35.3% (n=141) to 41.5% (n=166).

Conclusions: Regulatory action on flavored e-cigarettes influenced community discourse, increasing conversations about policy and DIY mixing techniques, but not significantly affecting discussions of safety. Continued surveillance of DIY communities is necessary to inform future public health strategies.

对Reddit上一个diy电子烟社区的混合方法分析。
导言:调味电子烟在美国年轻人中的使用仍然很普遍,这促使美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)采取了监管行动。2020年1月2日,FDA宣布了一项针对调味电子烟的联邦禁令,人们可以通过在线社区分享的不受监管的DIY方法来规避这一禁令。理解这些社区内的话语对于理解意外的政策影响至关重要。这项研究的主要目的是描述reddit上一个DIY电子烟版块的讨论,次要目的是研究2020年禁令后讨论的变化。方法:我们对reddit r/DIY_eJuice(一个专注于DIY电子液体混合的在线社区)的帖子进行了混合方法研究。2019年1月至2021年1月期间,共提取了5110个职位,其中2020年1月2日之前的职位被定义为禁令前期,之后的职位被定义为禁令后期。从该数据集中,我们随机选择了800篇帖子(占总数的17%;400篇禁令前和400篇禁令后),由三名训练有素的人类编码员使用系统开发的包含12个主题类别的代码本进行编码。采用卡方检验比较不同时期的主题分布。结果:DIY混合方法(76%,n=605)和关于口味的讨论(49%,n=390)是两个时期最常见的话题,尽管有口味禁令。政策相关讨论从禁令前的3.5% (n=14)显著增加到禁令后的8.3% (n=33) (p=0.004)。在禁令前后,与安全问题有关的员额仍然很少。两段时间内,新手用户的比例保持在22%不变(禁令前n=90,禁令后n=88),而有经验用户的讨论从35.3% (n=141)增加到41.5% (n=166)。结论:调味电子烟的监管行动影响了社区话语,增加了关于政策和DIY混合技术的对话,但对安全性的讨论没有显著影响。有必要继续监测DIY社区,以便为未来的公共卫生战略提供信息。
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
155
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
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
小红书