Maintenance Notice

Due to necessary scheduled maintenance, the JMIR Publications website will be unavailable from Wednesday, July 01, 2020 at 8:00 PM to 10:00 PM EST. We apologize in advance for any inconvenience this may cause you.

Who will be affected?

Accepted for/Published in: Journal of Medical Internet Research

Date Submitted: May 16, 2019
Open Peer Review Period: May 21, 2019 - Jul 16, 2019
Date Accepted: Dec 19, 2019
(closed for review but you can still tweet)

The final, peer-reviewed published version of this preprint can be found here:

Online Information on Electronic Cigarettes: Comparative Study of Relevant Websites From Baidu and Google Search Engines

Chen T, Gentry S, Qiu D, Deng Y, Notley C, Cheng G, Song F

Online Information on Electronic Cigarettes: Comparative Study of Relevant Websites From Baidu and Google Search Engines

J Med Internet Res 2020;22(1):e14725

DOI: 10.2196/14725

PMID: 32012069

PMCID: 7007591

Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.

Online Information on Electronic Cigarettes: Comparative Study of Relevant Websites From Baidu and Google Search Engines

  • Ting Chen; 
  • Sarah Gentry; 
  • Dechao Qiu; 
  • Yan Deng; 
  • Caitlin Notley; 
  • Guangwen Cheng; 
  • Fujian Song

Background:

Online information on electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) may influence people’s perception and use of e-cigarettes. Websites with information on e-cigarettes in the Chinese language have not been systematically assessed.

Objective:

The aim of this study was to assess and compare the types and credibility of Web-based information on e-cigarettes identified from Google (in English) and Baidu (in Chinese) search engines.

Methods:

We used the keywords vaping or e-cigarettes to conduct a search on Google and the equivalent Chinese characters for Baidu. The first 50 unique and relevant websites from each of the two search engines were included in this analysis. The main characteristics of the websites, credibility of the websites, and claims made on the included websites were systematically assessed and compared.

Results:

Compared with websites on Google, more websites on Baidu were owned by manufacturers or retailers (15/50, 30% vs 33/50, 66%; P<.001). None of the Baidu websites, compared to 24% (12/50) of Google websites, were provided by public or health professional institutions. The Baidu websites were more likely to contain e-cigarette advertising (P<.001) and less likely to provide information on health education (P<.001). The overall credibility of the included Baidu websites was lower than that of the Google websites (P<.001). An age restriction warning was shown on all advertising websites from Google (15/15) but only on 10 of the 33 (30%) advertising websites from Baidu (P<.001). Conflicting or unclear health and social claims were common on the included websites.

Conclusions:

Although conflicting or unclear claims on e-cigarettes were common on websites from both Baidu and Google search engines, there was a lack of online information from public health authorities in China. Unbiased information and evidence-based recommendations on e-cigarettes should be provided by public health authorities to help the public make informed decisions regarding the use of e-cigarettes.


 Citation

Please cite as:

Chen T, Gentry S, Qiu D, Deng Y, Notley C, Cheng G, Song F

Online Information on Electronic Cigarettes: Comparative Study of Relevant Websites From Baidu and Google Search Engines

J Med Internet Res 2020;22(1):e14725

DOI: 10.2196/14725

PMID: 32012069

PMCID: 7007591

The author of this paper has made a PDF available, but requires the user to login, or create an account.

© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.