Global trends in e-cigarette regulatory compliance

Background: Electronic cigarettes, commonly referred to as e-cigarettes, have spread rapidly across global markets. Their growth has created regulatory concerns involving product safety, nicotine levels, youth access, advertising practices, flavor controls, and protection of public health. Countries have adopted different regulatory approaches because of variation in public health priorities, tobacco-control policies, and legal systems. Bibliometric analysis cannot measure whether regulations are effective, but it can show how the scientific literature informing policy has developed and where new regulatory concerns are emerging. Objective: This study aimed to map the global scientific literature on e-cigarette regulation and regulatory compliance, identify major contributors and research patterns, and detect emerging policy-related topics that require further study. Methods: A bibliometric analysis was conducted using Scopus-indexed publications published between 2004 and August 2024. After applying predefined eligibility criteria, the final records were analyzed using VOSviewer software (Centre for Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University). The analysis examined publication growth, citation activity, co-authorship networks, institutional and country collaborations, co-citation links, keyword co-occurrence, and overlay visualization. Results: The final dataset included 984 publications. The United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada were the most active countries in this research area. The University of Waterloo, King’s College London, and the Ontario Institute for Cancer Research were among the leading institutions. The main journals publishing work in this field were Nicotine & Tobacco Research, Tobacco Control, and the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. Keyword findings showed a gradual movement away from broader tobacco-control research toward topics such as youth vaping, electronic nicotine delivery systems, flavor regulation, public policy, and regulatory compliance. These patterns reflect changing research priorities that can support future regulatory studies and policy development. Conclusion: Scientific research on e-cigarette regulation has grown markedly during the past 2 decades. Although bibliometric methods cannot determine whether a policy works, they provide a structured view of how evidence in this field has developed. Future studies should combine bibliometric findings with comparative policy studies to improve understanding of how e-cigarette regulatory frameworks are implemented and what effects they produce.