When meta-analysis misleads: the need for methodological integrity in e-cigarette research

Abstract

Tobacco harm reduction (THR), especially in the context of electronic cigarette (EC) research, remains highly contested within public health, often due to studies compromised by methodological flaws [ 1 , 2 , 3 ]. These shortcomings in study design, analysis, terminology, or interpretation can distort scientific record, erode public trust, and generate misleading or uncritical media coverage and policy reports [ 4 , 5 , 6 ]. These challenges become especially consequential when flawed evidence is aggregated and amplified through meta-analyses, which play a central role in shaping policy and clinical guidance.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.