Kim Romijnders

Ms. Kim Romijnders


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

9Years (2018-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
KRKim Romijnders
Kim Romijnders
LOLiesbeth van Osch
Liesbeth van Osch
HVHein de Vries
Hein de Vries
RTReinskje Talhout
Reinskje Talhout
This paper aims to provide an in-depth understanding of the attractiveness of e-cigarettes for several different groups. For this purpose, perceptions of and reasons for e-cigarette use were systematically reviewed as reported by e-cigarette users, cigarette smokers, dual users, and non-users, among both adults and youth. MEDLINE® and Scopus were used to search for relevant articles, and references of included studies were also investigated. Two reviewers screened all titles and abstracts independently, blinded to authors and journal titles (Cohen’s Kappa = 0.83), resulting in 72 eligible articles. Risk perceptions, perceived benefits, and reasons for e-cigarette use were categorized in themes and sub-themes. Risk perceptions included harmfulness in general, and specific health risks. Perceived benefits included improved taste and smell, and safety for bystanders. Reasons for use included (health) benefits, curiosity, smoking cessation, and friends using e-cigarettes. The findings highlight that there is a variety of perceptions and reasons mentioned by adult and youth e-cigarette users, cigarette smokers, dual users, and non-users. As such, this overview provides valuable information for scientists, public health professionals, behavior change experts, and regulators to improve future research, risk communication, and possibilities to effectively regulate e-cigarettes.

1 September 2019 in Vaccine
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
KRKim Romijnders
Kim Romijnders
SSStephne L. van Seventer
Stephne L. van Seventer
MSManon Scheltema
Manon Scheltema
LOLiesbeth van Osch
Liesbeth van Osch
HVHein de Vries
Hein de Vries
LMLiesbeth Mollema
Liesbeth Mollema
In light of the decline in childhood vaccination coverage, the question rises concerning what factors play a role in informed decision-making about childhood vaccination. Insight into factors related to this decision helps us to support parents' informed decision-making about childhood vaccination. We conducted 12 semi-structured focus group interviews across the Netherlands based on a definition of informed decision-making: three with acceptors, three with refusers, and six with partial acceptors to ask about knowledge, attitudes, deliberation, and information needs. We performed a thematic analysis of the transcripts. Acceptors viewed the decision to participate in the National Immunization Program (NIP) as self-evident. Refusers and partial acceptors, however, reported to extensively deliberate the pros and cons of accepting or refusing the NIP in much detail. Their answers indicated that their knowledge was not always evidence-based. In addition, refusers and partial acceptors perceived fewer risks of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), more risks of side-effects of vaccines, less social support from their environment, less trust in child welfare centers (CWCs), and information provided than acceptors. We observed distinct differences in factors related to decision-making about childhood vaccination between acceptors, refusers, and partial acceptors. Acceptors in the current study perceived accepting childhood vaccinations as self-evident, refusers relied mostly on anecdotal information rather than evidence-based information to weigh up the pros and cons vaccines and the VPDs, and partial acceptors elaborately deliberated the pros and cons of each vaccine and VPD individually, which was time-consuming and difficult. To strengthen and support decision-making among parents, more elaborate dialogues are needed between Child Vaccine Providers (CVPs) and parents. These discussions could build trust between parents and CVPs, be used to discuss the evidence-based advantages of childhood vaccinations, and to decrease parents' susceptibility to anecdotal information and misperceptions about childhood vaccinations shared by other parents.

KRKim Romijnders
Kim Romijnders
EKErna Jz Krüsemann
Erna Jz Krüsemann
SBSanne Boesveldt
Sanne Boesveldt
KGKees de Graaf
Kees de Graaf
HVHein de Vries
Hein de Vries
RTReinskje Talhout
Reinskje Talhout
Appealing product characteristics, such as flavors, may stimulate e-cigarette use. While switching to e-cigarettes may reduce harm for smokers, concerns exist about e-cigarette use among never-smokers. The role of flavors in the decision to switch to or refrain from vaping is unclear. This study used a bottom–up approach to investigate the relation between flavor preferences and individual factors related to vaping between various user groups. A cross-sectional survey was conducted among never-users (n = 407), smokers (n = 138), dual users (n = 122), and exclusive vapers (n = 61) in the Netherlands. Demographics, attractiveness of product characteristics, flavor preferences, and individual factors related to vaping (knowledge, trust, perceived susceptibility, attitude, social influence, deliberation, and intention) were assessed. The availability of different flavors was the most attractive characteristic of e-cigarettes. Dual users and exclusive vapers had most often used tobacco and menthol/mint flavors when they first started vaping. Compared to dual users, exclusive vapers currently used more fruit and sweet flavors. Never-users who were interested in trying an e-liquid flavor had more knowledge about and a more positive attitude towards e-cigarettes. Smokers who were interested in trying a flavor had a more positive attitude towards e-cigarettes and experienced the social influence towards not using e-cigarettes as less strong than those who did not want to try any flavor. Hence, individual factors related to vaping differed depending on whether never-users and smokers wanted to try an e-liquid flavor. This means that flavors may moderate differences found in individual factors related to vaping, or vice versa.

KRKim Romijnders
Kim Romijnders
LOLiesbeth van Osch
Liesbeth van Osch
HVHein de Vries
Hein de Vries
RTReinskje Talhout
Reinskje Talhout
E-cigarettes are increasingly popular among both cigarette smokers and non-users. Although smoking cessation yields the most individual and population health benefits, switching to exclusive e-cigarette use offers some individual health benefits for cigarette smokers. However, e-cigarette use is not harmless, and its use among non-cigarette smokers should be prevented. Our study aims to explore the decision-making process about e-cigarettes among an e-cigarette users, cigarette smokers, and non-users. We conducted 12 semi-structured focus group interviews with e-cigarette users, cigarette smokers, and non-users. We performed a thematic analysis of the interview transcripts. First, knowledge reported by e-cigarette users was mainly based on other users’ experiences. Second, cigarette smokers and non-users were more negative towards e-cigarettes than e-cigarette users. Third, e-cigarette users considered switching from cigarette smoking to e-cigarette use by deliberating relevant information, and weighing up the benefits and disadvantages of e-cigarette use versus smoking. Additionally, important factors in the decision-making process were a perception of risks and benefits of e-cigarettes compared to cigarettes, a supportive social environment about e-cigarette use, and trust in information offered about the risks and benefits of e-cigarettes. Our findings provide insight into what we can learn from the conscious decision-making process of e-cigarette users who switched from cigarettes to e-cigarettes. This information can be considered to develop targeted communications strategies to stimulate a conscious decision-making process, these may highlight benefits of switching to e-cigarettes for cigarette smokers, discussing the risks of smoking, and correcting misperceptions about the perceived risks and benefits of e-cigarette use.

KRKim Romijnders
Kim Romijnders
JPJeroen L. A. Pennings
Jeroen L. A. Pennings
LOLiesbeth van Osch
Liesbeth van Osch
HVHein de Vries
Hein de Vries
RTReinskje Talhout
Reinskje Talhout
Although total cessation of nicotine and tobacco products would be most beneficial to improve public health, exclusive e-cigarette use has potential health benefits for smokers compared to cigarette smoking. This study investigated differences between dual users and exclusive e-cigarette users provide information to optimize health communication about smoking and vaping. A cross-sectional survey (n = 116) among 80 current, adult dual users and 36 current, adult-exclusive e-cigarette users was conducted in the Netherlands. The questionnaire assessed four clusters of factors: (1) Past and current smoking and vaping behavior, (2) product characteristics used, (3) attractiveness and reasons related to cigarettes and e-cigarettes, and (4) socio-cognitive factors regarding smoking, vaping, and not smoking or vaping. We used random forest—a machine learning algorithm—to identify distinguishing features between dual users and e-cigarette users. We are able to discern a dual user from an exclusive e-cigarette user with 86.2% accuracy based on seven factors: Social ties with other smokers, quantity of tobacco cigarettes smoked in the past (e-cigarette users) or currently (dual users), self-efficacy to not vape and smoke, unattractiveness of cigarettes, attitude towards e-cigarettes, barriers: accessibility of e-cigarettes, and intention to quit vaping (A). This combination of features provides information on how to improve health communication about smoking and vaping.