ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The impact of misinformation about vapes' relative harms compared with smoking may lead to increased tobacco-related burden of disease. To date, no systematic efforts have been made to chart interventions that mitigate vaping-related misinformation. We plan to conduct a scoping review that seeks to fill gaps in the current knowledge of interventions that mitigate vaping-related misinformation. METHODS: A scoping review focusing on interventions that mitigate vaping-related misinformation will be conducted. We will search (no date restrictions) MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Web of Science Core Collection, Global Health, ERIC, and Sociological Abstracts. Gray literature will be identified using Disaster Lit, Google Scholar, Open Science Framework, governmental websites, and preprint servers (e.g., EuropePMC, PsyArXiv, MedRxiv, JMIR Preprints). Study selection will conform to Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewers' Manual 2020 Methodology for JBI Scoping Reviews. Only English language, original studies will be considered for inclusion. Two reviewers will independently screen all citations, full-text articles, and abstract data. A narrative summary of findings will be conducted. Data analysis will involve quantitative (e.g., frequencies) and qualitative (e.g., content and thematic analysis) methods. Where possible, a single effect size of exposure to the mitigation of vaping-related misinformation will be calculated per sample. Similarly, where possible, each study will be coded for moderating characteristics to find and account for systematic differences in the size of the effect or outcome that is being analyzed. Quality will be appraised with the study quality assessment tools utilized by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Findings will be subjected to several different publication bias tests: Egger's regression test, Begg and Mazumdar's ran correlation test, and generation of a funnel plot with effect sizes plotted against a corresponding standard error. DISCUSSION: Original research is urgently needed to design interventions to mitigate vaping-related misinformation. The planned scoping review will help to address this gap. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework osf/io/hy3tk.
Subject(s)
Communication , Vaping , Humans , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Vaping/adverse effectsABSTRACT
The impact of misinformation about vapes' relative harms compared with smoking may lead to increased tobacco-related burden of disease and youth vaping. Unfortunately, vaping misinformation has proliferated. Despite growing attempts to mitigate vaping misinformation, there is still considerable ambiguity regarding the ability to effectively curb the negative impact of misinformation. To address this gap, we use a meta-analysis to evaluate the relative impact of interventions designed to mitigate vaping-related misinformation. We searched (from January 2020 till August 2021) various databases and gray literature. Only English language, original studies that employed experimental designs where participants were randomly assigned either to receive mitigating information or to a no-mitigation condition (either misinformation-only or neutral control) were included. Meta-analysis was conducted for the four eligible studies. The mean effect size of attempts to mitigate vaping misinformation was positive but not statistically significant (d = 0.383, 95% CI [-0.029, 0.796], p = .061, k = 5) with lack of evidence for publication bias. Given limited studies included, we were unable to determine factors affecting the efficacy of interventions. The limited focus on non-US studies and youth populations is concerning given the popularity of vaping in low- to middle-income countries (LMICs) and among youth. The findings of this meta-analysis describe the current state of the literature and prescribe specific recommendations to better address the proliferation of vaping misinformation, providing insights helpful in limiting the tobacco mortality burden and curtailing youth vaping.
