- A study examining why US teenagers start and continue vaping has been retracted after problems were found in its data analysis.
- The Journal of Adolescent Health says the flaws affected the results reported in the paper.
- The retraction was requested by both the journal’s editor-in-chief and the study authors, who said the errors were accidental.
- The paper had reported differences in vaping motivations by sex, race and ethnicity, but those findings should no longer be treated as reliable evidence.
A study that claimed to identify different reasons why US teenagers start and continue vaping has been retracted after errors in the data analysis were found to have affected its results.
The paper, Demographic Drivers of E-Cigarette Use Initiation and Continuation Among US Adolescents, was published in the Journal of Adolescent Health in February 2026.
It analysed data from the 2023 National Youth Tobacco Survey and reported a series of differences in vaping motivations between male and female adolescents and between racial and ethnic groups.
But the journal has now withdrawn the study at the request of both its editor-in-chief and the authors.
The official retraction notice says the paper contained “flaws in the analysis of the data which affected the results reported”.
It adds: “The errors made during the analysis of the data were entirely accidental.”
The notice does not explain exactly what went wrong with the analysis, which statistical results were affected or whether any of the paper’s individual findings remain valid. The published article is now clearly marked as retracted.
What the study had claimed
Researchers from the University of Alabama had used responses from the 2023 National Youth Tobacco Survey, a large school-based US survey, to examine teenagers’ stated reasons for trying vapes and continuing to use them.
The paper said its analysis included 3,391 respondents who had ever vaped. Researchers used statistical tests to compare reported motivations according to sex, race and ethnicity.
Among the results, the now-retracted paper had reported that curiosity and peer influence were common reasons for first trying a vape, while seeking a nicotine high and feelings of anxiety, stress or depression were more commonly reported among those continuing to vape.
It also claimed female adolescents were more likely than males to report emotional distress as a reason for vaping, while males were more likely to cite curiosity and peer influence.
Further findings suggested differences between Black, White and Hispanic adolescents in the reasons they gave for vaping.
Those findings formed the basis for recommendations that youth vaping prevention should be tailored according to demographic group, including greater mental health support and peer-focused interventions.
The paper also argued for culturally targeted prevention programmes and said regulation of flavoured products remained an important policy tool.
Those conclusions can no longer be supported by this paper following its retraction.
Retraction goes beyond the study’s original limitations
Even before it was withdrawn, the researchers had acknowledged important limits to what their analysis could show.
The survey captured responses at a single point in time, meaning it could not establish that particular factors caused teenagers to vape. Responses were also self-reported, while the authors noted that the survey’s relatively low response rate could affect how widely the results could be applied.
Crucially, the paper described its statistical approach as descriptive rather than causal and said each demographic factor was examined independently rather than using a multivariable model capable of accounting for several factors simultaneously.
The retraction represents a more fundamental problem. Rather than simply warning readers to interpret the findings cautiously, the journal says flaws occurred in the analysis itself and affected the reported results.
Findings should no longer be relied on
The paper moved from its statistical findings to detailed proposals for targeted interventions, including mental health programmes, peer-led education and policies aimed at flavoured vapes.
Once the underlying analysis is known to contain errors that affected its results, those recommendations cannot be justified on the strength of this study.
The retraction notice is listed by PubMed and identifies the original February 2026 paper as retracted.
