Background Vaping is growing in popularity worldwide, especially among young adults. To develop effective tobacco prevention interventions, first, there must be an understanding of the attitudes and perceptions of young adults toward the use of vaping. Highlighting perception discrepancies between races may allow physicians to more effectively counsel their patients regarding the risks of vaping. Methodology We conducted an online survey using Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk, https://www.mturk.com /) to identify misconceptions about vaping among adults aged 18 to 24 years who currently vape. The survey consisted of 18 questions evaluating reasons for vaping, history of tobacco use, and thoughts on the adverse effects of vaping. The Penn State Electronic Cigarette Dependence Index was implemented to assess dependence. Exclusion criteria comprised respondents who did not vape and were under the age of 18 or over the age of 24. Results A total of 1,009 responses were received with 66% identifying as male ( n = 667) and 33% ( n = 332) identifying as female. Sixty-nine percent of patients smoked cigarettes or used another form of tobacco previously ( n = 692). Of those respondents, 81% indicated that they had since quit using tobacco products (excluding vaping). Switching to vaping was the most common reason for quitting cigarettes or other forms of tobacco, with health concerns and social purposes being the second and third most common reasons provided, respectively. When asked whether vaping had negative health impacts, only 238 (24%) participants strongly agreed with this statement, while a majority (64%) neither agreed nor disagreed or only somewhat agreed. Most participants were white or Caucasian ( n = 777). When asked whether smoking or vaping had more severe health implications, 55% of white or Caucasian participants, 41% of Asian participants, and 32% of black or African American participants indicated that vaping was worse than smoking cigarettes. The average Penn State dependence score was 8.7, suggesting medium dependence. Conclusions Our survey sample of 1,006 young adults who vape indicated that the majority did not perceive vaping as significantly harmful. A comprehensive smoking prevention policy, educational interventions, and quit support are needed to enhance awareness among young adults about the health effects associated with vaping. Such interventions should also consider the novel shift toward the replacement of smoking with vaping.
Introduction Infertility and hypogonadism in males can greatly affect their reproductive health and overall well-being. Since exogenous testosterone administration for hypogonadism management may disrupt the normal hormonal cascade necessary for spermatogenesis, clomiphene citrate (CC) and enclomiphene citrate (EC) are medications often used to manage hypogonadism and male infertility. This study aims to directly compare the effects of CC and EC on serum testosterone levels and semen parameters in men to determine which medication may have an advantage in managing these conditions. Materials and methods We retrospectively analyzed ≥18-year-old men presenting with primary infertility, abnormal semen parameters, or hypogonadism who received CC or EC monotherapy for at least three months between January 2021 and December 2022. We compared baseline and follow-up hormone levels, semen parameters, and demographics. Variables were compared using paired and unpaired t-tests. Significance was assessed at p <0.05. Results A total of 46 men received EC and 32 men received CC. The median age was 42 (IQR: 34-47.75) years in men who received EC and 41 (IQR: 36-44) years in men who received CC ( p =0.450). The two treatment groups exhibited a significant increase in serum total testosterone, while only EC had a statistically significant increase in FSH and LH. Semen volume and concentration did not significantly change with either treatment. Sperm motility increased in both groups, but total motile sperm count (TMSC) only significantly increased in men who received EC. Conclusions Our study found that EC and CC are effective treatments in increasing total testosterone without negatively affecting spermatogenesis. EC demonstrated to be more effective in raising gonadotropin levels and TMSC.
Background The outcome of a statistical test is to accept or reject a null hypothesis. Reporting a metric as “trending toward significance” is a misinterpretation of the p-value. Studies highlighting the prevalence of statistical errors in the urologic literature remain scarce. We evaluated abstracts from 15 urology journals published within the years 2000-2021 and provided a quantitative measure of a common statistical mistake-misconstruing the function of null hypothesis testing by reporting “a trend toward significance.” Materials and methods We performed an audit of 15 urology journals, looking at articles published from January 1, 2000, to January 1, 2022. A word recognition function in Microsoft Excel was utilized to identify the use of the word “trend” in the abstracts. Each use of the word “trend” was manually investigated by two authors to determine whether it was improperly used in describing non-statistically significant data as trending toward significance. Statistics and data analysis were performed using Python libraries: pandas, scipy.stats, and seaborn. Results This study included 101,134 abstracts from 15 urology journals. Within those abstracts, the word “trend” was used 2,509 times, 572 uses of which were describing non-statistically significant data as trending toward significance. There was a statistically significant difference in the rate of errors between the 15 journals (p < 0.01). The highest rate of improper use of the word “trend” was found in Bladder Cancer with a rate of 1.6% (p < 0.01) of articles. The lowest rate of improper use was found in European Urology, with a rate of 0.3% (p < 0.01). Our analysis found a moderate correlation between the number of articles published and the number of misuses of the word "trend" within each journal and across all journals every year (r = 0.61 and 0.70, respectively). Conclusion The overall rate of p-value misinterpretation never exceeded 2% of articles in each journal. There is significance in the difference in misinterpretation rates between the different journals. Authors' utilization of the word “trend” describing non-significant p-values as being near significant should be used with caution.
Men’s health represents an often-overlooked aspect of public health. Men have higher mortality rates worldwide and are more negatively affected by chronic conditions such as obesity and heart disease, as well as addiction to alcohol and tobacco. Men also have health issues such as prostate cancer and male sexual dysfunction which only affect them. Because of the skewed burden of morbidity and mortality on men, it is imperative from a public health perspective to make a concerted effort to specifically improve men’s health. The use of wearable devices in medical practice presents a novel avenue to invest in men’s health in a safe, easily scalable, and economic fashion. Wearable devices are now ubiquitous in society, and their use in the healthcare setting is only increasing with time. There are commercially available devices such as smart watches which are available to lay people and healthcare professionals alike to improve overall health and wellness, and there are also purpose-built wearable devices which are used to track or treat a specific disease. In our review of the literature, we found that while research in the field of wearable devices is still in its early stages, there is ample evidence that wearable devices can greatly improve men’s health in the long-term.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.