ArticleAtencion primaria2002
[Smoking cessation in primary and specialized care: a real opportunity and a public health necessity].
Article in Atencion primaria, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of biochemical markers as adjuncts to the Fagerström test in evaluating nicotine dependence: A retrospective observational study.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2026Article
- [Smoking intervention in patients with cardiovascular diseases].Atencion primaria · 2013Article
- [Evaluation of the primary health care reform: preventive practices and inequalities].Atencion primaria · 2007Article
- [Age of smoking initiation as predictor in smoking cessation].Atencion primaria · 2005Article
- [Initial assessment for weaning people off tobacco. Do we in primary care know where we are starting from?].Atencion primaria · 2004Article
- [More on tobacco dependency].Atencion primaria · 2003Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo determine whether primary care provides a suitable framework for integrated treatment aimed at smoking cessation with systematic minimal intervention or pharmacological treatment with nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). To compare the results with those obtained in a specialized pneumology unit.
designProspective, quasi-experimental study.
settingPrimary and specialized care services.
participants357 smokers who were followed at a health center (166) or a specialized clinic (191) during a 6-month period.
interventionsTwo types of intervention were used depending on the patients' degree of nicotine dependence: systematic minimal intervention for those with low dependence or who were still in the contemplation or precontemplation phase, and NRT for those with high dependence, in the preparation phase.
main outcome measuresTwelve months after the start of the study, abstinence among participants who received systematic minimal intervention was 36.5% in primary care patients and 41.8% in specialized care patients (P>.05). Among participants who received NRT abstinence was 37.1% in the former group and 35.5% in the latter (P>.05). The percentage of patients lost to follow-up was 8.6% in specialized care and 6.3% in primary care.
conclusionsThe results lead us to recommend smoking cessation treatment integrated in the primary care setting, either with systematic minimal intervention or NRT.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.