| Title |
Concentration of Nicotine and Glycols in 27 Electronic Cigarette Formulations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Analytical Toxicology, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1093/jat/bkw037 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Michelle R. Peace, Tyson R. Baird, Nathaniel Smith, Carl E. Wolf, Justin L. Poklis, Alphonse Poklis |
| Abstract |
Personal battery-powered vaporizers or electronic cigarettes were developed to deliver a nicotine vapor such that smokers could simulate smoking tobacco without the inherent pathology of inhaled tobacco smoke. Electronic cigarettes and their e-cigarette liquid formulations are virtually unregulated. These formulations are typically composed of propylene glycol and/or glycerin, flavoring components and an active drug, such as nicotine. Twenty-seven e-cigarette liquid formulations that contain nicotine between 6 and 22 mg/L were acquired within the USA and analyzed by various methods to determine their contents. They were screened by Direct Analysis in Real Time™ Mass Spectrometry (DART-MS). Nicotine was confirmed and quantitated by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, and the glycol composition was confirmed and quantitated by gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The DART-MS screening method was able to consistently identify the exact mass peaks resulting from the protonated molecular ion of nicotine, glycol and a number of flavor additives within 5 mmu. Nicotine concentrations were determined to range from 45 to 131% of the stated label concentration, with 18 of the 27 have >10% variance. Glycol composition was generally accurate to the product description, with only one exception where the propylene glycol to glycerin percentage ratio was stated as 50:50 and the determined concentration of propylene glycol to glycerin was 81:19 (% v/v). No unlabeled glycols were detected in these formulations. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 20% |
| Spain | 1 | 20% |
| United States | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 40% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 60% |
| Scientists | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 106 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 106 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 13 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 10% |
| Researcher | 9 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 17 | 16% |
| Unknown | 35 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 22 | 21% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 9 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 5% |
| Psychology | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 20 | 19% |
| Unknown | 39 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 27. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 04 July 2023.
All research outputs
#1,328,318
of 23,989,432 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Analytical Toxicology
#71
of 1,921 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,491
of 308,699 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Analytical Toxicology
#2
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,989,432 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,921 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 308,699 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.