Search

INTRODUCTION Although e-cigarettes can be an effective form of nicotine substitution for adults attempting to quit smoking, their use among children and young people is a concern. Accurate data about this are needed to inform debates over policy and regulation in the UK and elsewhere. METHODS Using data from an online survey of 2,613 people aged 11 to 18 years, conducted by the market research company YouGov in March 2022, we present prevalence estimates of e-cigarette and tobacco use.We use logistic regression models to assess differences in e-cigarette use, tobacco use and use of disposable e-cigarettes across a range of covariates including age, sex, tobacco smoking status, social class and country. RESULTS Among the 18.0% of those surveyed who reported ever having smoked a cigarette, 83.9% were not regular (at least once per week) smokers and 16.1% were (15.1% and 2.9% of the total sample respectively). Among the 19.2% of those surveyed who had ever used an e-cigarette, 79.2% were not regular users, while 20.8% were (15.2% and 4.0% respectively. Regular e-cigarette use was more common than regular tobacco smoking (4.0% vs 2.9%). E-cigarette use was more common among those who also smoked tobacco, with 9.0% of never e-cigarette users ever smoking tobacco, compared with 89.4% of regular e-cigarette users. Both smoking and e-cigarette use were associated with increasing age and use by others within the home, but not with social class. Use of disposable e-cigarettes was reported by 53.8% of those who have ever used an e-cigarette, and more common among girls than boys. DISCUSSION Regular e-cigarette use is now more common than smoking in children and youth, though the majority of this is among those who have also smoked tobacco. Measures to reduce the appeal of e-both e-cigarettes and tobacco to children and young people are warranted.

The present study examined the development of phonological and reading skills in 171 students (98 males, 73 females) from the beginning of first grade (Time 1) to the end of second grade (Time 4). Based on their reading and intelligence scores at the end of second grade, these students were placed into nondisabled (ND), reading disabled (RD), or garden-variety poor reading (GV) groups. Although each group made gains in phonological processing, large differences were found between the ND and RD/GV groups. The RD and GV groups performed similarly on many of the tasks. Consistent with the literature, it was found that intelligence does not differentiate between good and poor readers. The most important finding of the present study was that reader-group membership at Time 4 could be very accurately determined from students' Time 1 scores. All of the children in the RD and GV groups were correctly identified, and only 3 of the 148 ND children were misclassified, indicating that children at risk for reading difficulties can be very accurately identified very early in their academic experiences.