VapingNCT06274723
Responses to E-cigarette Message Source and Presentation
A study testing Expert, one-sided, Expert, two-sided and Peer, one-sided in people with Vaping, run by University of Massachusetts, Worcester at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The goal of this clinical trial is to use crowdsourcing to test the effects of a message source (expert and peer) and message presentation types (one-sided and two-sided) to identify the optimal message type for young adults who vape and do not vape. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 24 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Vaping
- What is being tested?
- Expert, one-sided, Expert, two-sided and Peer, one-sided
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 848 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 5 Nov 2024to 17 Dec 2024
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 24 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- US residents ages 18-24
- Fluent in English
- Reporting either vaping in the past 30 days or not having vaped in the past 30 days but susceptible to vaping
Who cannot join
- Age less than 18 or above 24
- Not fluent in English
- Not a member of partnering crowdsourcing behavioral research platform conducting the study
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
UMass Chan Medical School
Worcester, Massachusetts, 01605
About this study
Official title: Identifying and Examining the Effects of Source and Presentation on Responses to Electronic Cigarette Public Education Messages in Young Adult Vapers and Non-vapers - Part 1
The goal of this clinical trial is to use crowdsourcing to test the effects of a message source (expert and peer) and message presentation types (one-sided and two-sided) to identify the optimal message type for young adults who vape and do not vape.
- Conditions
- Vaping
- Being tested
- Expert, one-sided, Expert, two-sided, Peer, one-sided, Peer, two-sided
- Medical subject headings
- Vaping
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Expert, one-sidedOther
Participants will view a brief description of an expert source and see one-sided e-cigarette education messages.
Expert, two-sidedOther
Participants will view a brief description of an expert source and see two-sided e-cigarette education messages.
Peer, one-sidedOther
Participants will view a brief description of a peer source and see one-sided e-cigarette education messages.
Peer, two-sidedOther
Participants will view a brief description of a peer source and see two-sided e-cigarette education messages.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Expert, one-sided | Experimental | Participants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition will receive one-sided e-cigarette messages from an expert source. Receives: Other: Expert, one-sided |
| Expert, two-sided | Experimental | Participants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition will receive two-sided e-cigarette messages from an expert source. Receives: Other: Expert, two-sided |
| Peer, one-sided | Experimental | Participants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition will receive one-sided e-cigarette messages from a peer source. Receives: Other: Peer, one-sided |
| Peer, two-sided | Experimental | Participants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition will receive two-sided e-cigarette messages from a peer source. Receives: Other: Peer, two-sided |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Message Acceptance
Participants' self-reported message acceptance were measured by using a five-point Likert scale using five items assessing whether participants thought the message was worth remembering, grabbed their attention, powerful, convincing, and meaningful on a scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score, and this was done for each arm for each vaping status. Higher scores indicate more more message acceptance, therefore better outcomes.
Measured: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Harm Perceptions
Harm perceptions was measured by a single item e-cigarette harm perceptions question assessing participants' perceived absolute harm of e-cigarette use on a scale from 1 (Not at all harmful) to 10 (Very harmful). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater vaping harm perceptions, therefore indicating better outcome.
Measured: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Secondary outcomes (6)
Negative Cognition
Negative cognition was measured by six-item reactance questionnaire, such as perceptions of messages being manipulative, misleading, distorted, overblown, exaggerated, and overstated on a scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). Higher scores indicate greater negative cognition, indicating worse outcome.
Measured: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Message Anger
Message anger was measured by four item message anger question assessing the extent to which the messages made participants feel irritated, angry, annoyed, and aggravated on a scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (very much). Items were summed and averaged. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater anger toward messages, indicating worse outcomes.
Measured: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Message Liking
Message liking will be measured by a single-item liking of the message on scale from 1 (Dislike very much) to 5 (Like very much). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater message liking, therefore indicating better outcome.
Measured: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Source Trust
Source trust was measured by a single-item trust in health information source questionnaire, such as trust in source about vaping information on a scale from 1(Not at all) to 5 (Very much so). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater source trust, therefore indicating better outcome
Measured: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Attitudes
Participants' self-reported vaping attitudes were measured by using a five-point bipolar scale using 7 subscale items assessing whether participants thought vaping was enjoyable, healthy, safe, fun, smart, cool, and attractive on a scale from 1 (negative attitudes) to 5 (positive attitudes). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score, and this was done for each arm for each vaping status. Higher scores indicate more positive e-cigarette attitudes, therefore worse outcomes.
Measured: After exposure to all messages (approximately up to 45 minutes), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Behavioral Intentions to Vape or Try Vaping
Participants' vaping or vaping trial intentions were measured by using a 3 subscale items assessing participants' intentions to vape: soon/anytime during the next year/would use offered by one of their best friends, on a scale from 1 (Definitely not) to 5 (Definitely yes). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater vaping intentions, therefore indicating worse outcome.
Measured: After exposure to all messages (approximately up to 45 minutes), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Feb 2024
- Study start5 Nov 2024
- Primary completion5 Dec 2024
- Study completion17 Dec 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for VapingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 848 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Massachusetts, Worcester
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Cancer Institute (NCI)
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Donghee Nicole Lee, University of Massachusetts, Worcester
- Investigators
- Donghee N Lee, PhD, Principal investigator, UMass Chan Medical School
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06274723
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- STUDY00001220
- Other IDs
- 1K99CA281094-01A1
- Status last verified
- Dec 2025
- First submitted
- 17 Jan 2024
- Last updated
- 14 Jan 2026
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Jan 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Identifying and Examining the Effects of Source and Presentation on Responses to Electronic Cigarette Public Education Messages in Young Adult Vapers and Non-vapers - Part 1
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06274723
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- STUDY00001220
- Conditions
- Vaping
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 848 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Massachusetts, WorcesterUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Cancer Institute (NCI)
- Study start
- 5 Nov 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 5 Dec 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 17 Dec 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Feb 2024 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 14 Jan 2026
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The goal of this clinical trial is to use crowdsourcing to test the effects of a message source (expert and peer) and message presentation types (one-sided and two-sided) to identify the optimal message type for young adults who vape and do not vape.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Expert, one-sided | Experimental | Other: Expert, one-sidedParticipants assigned to the expert, one-sidedness condition will receive one-sided e-cigarette messages from an expert source. |
| Expert, two-sided | Experimental | Other: Expert, two-sidedParticipants assigned to the expert, two-sidedness condition will receive two-sided e-cigarette messages from an expert source. |
| Peer, one-sided | Experimental | Other: Peer, one-sidedParticipants assigned to the peer, one-sidedness condition will receive one-sided e-cigarette messages from a peer source. |
| Peer, two-sided | Experimental | Other: Peer, two-sidedParticipants assigned to the peer, two-sidedness condition will receive two-sided e-cigarette messages from a peer source. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 24 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- US residents ages 18-24
- Fluent in English
- Reporting either vaping in the past 30 days or not having vaped in the past 30 days but susceptible to vaping
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Age less than 18 or above 24
- Not fluent in English
- Not a member of partnering crowdsourcing behavioral research platform conducting the study
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Expert, one-sidedParticipants will view a brief description of an expert source and see one-sided e-cigarette education messages. | Other | Expert, one-sided |
| Expert, two-sidedParticipants will view a brief description of an expert source and see two-sided e-cigarette education messages. | Other | Expert, two-sided |
| Peer, one-sidedParticipants will view a brief description of a peer source and see one-sided e-cigarette education messages. | Other | Peer, one-sided |
| Peer, two-sidedParticipants will view a brief description of a peer source and see two-sided e-cigarette education messages. | Other | Peer, two-sided |
Primary outcome
Message Acceptance
Time frame: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Participants' self-reported message acceptance were measured by using a five-point Likert scale using five items assessing whether participants thought the message was worth remembering, grabbed their attention, powerful, convincing, and meaningful on a scale from 1 (Strongly disagree) to 5 (Strongly agree). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score, and this was done for each arm for each vaping status. Higher scores indicate more more message acceptance, therefore better outcomes.
Harm Perceptions
Time frame: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Harm perceptions was measured by a single item e-cigarette harm perceptions question assessing participants' perceived absolute harm of e-cigarette use on a scale from 1 (Not at all harmful) to 10 (Very harmful). Items were summed and averaged to create a single composite score. This was done for each vaping status (current vapers and susceptible non-vapers). Higher scores indicate greater vaping harm perceptions, therefore indicating better outcome.
6 secondary outcomes
Negative Cognition
Time frame: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Message Anger
Time frame: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Message Liking
Time frame: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Source Trust
Time frame: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Attitudes
Time frame: After exposure to all messages (approximately up to 45 minutes), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Behavioral Intentions to Vape or Try Vaping
Time frame: After exposure to all messages (approximately up to 45 minutes), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 Jan 2026.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Vaping
Not yet recruiting
Flavored Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems to Lower Smoking and Exposure to Tobacco Toxicants Among Cigarette Smokers Interested in Quitting, REFLECT Trial
Tobacco Cessation, Electronic Nicotine Delivery Systems
Recruiting
Pilot Study of Communication for Dual Users of Cigarettes and E-cigarettes
Tobacco Products, Cigarettes
Recruiting
Circuit Breathing Exercise on Smoking Cessation Among Youth E-Cigarette Users
E Cigarette Use
Recruiting
A Behavioral Circuit Breathing Training Intervention on Smoking Cessation and Respiratory Function Among Youth Who Use E-cigarettes
E Cigarette Use
Not yet recruiting
Cardiovascular Impacts of E-cigarettes Among Older Adults
Hypertension, Tobacco Cigarette Smoking
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Donghee N Lee, PhD principal investigator
UMass Chan Medical School
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Expert, one-sided, Expert, two-sided and Peer, one-sided in people with Vaping, run by University of Massachusetts, Worcester at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 Jan 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 14 Jan 2026). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Message Acceptance (time frame: After exposure to each messages (approximately up to 20 minutes total), measured during a single study visit on Day 1.). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 14 Jan 2026.