Trial reportTobacco control2003
A randomised clinical trial of nicotine patches for treatment of spit tobacco addiction among adolescents.
Trial report in Tobacco control, 2003. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for smokeless tobacco use cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Smokeless tobacco cessation interventions: A systematic review.The Indian journal of medical research · 2018Pooled it
- Interventions for smokeless tobacco use cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Comparing an immediate cessation versus reduction approach to smokeless tobacco cessation.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2012Trial
- Non-combustible nicotine product cessation interventions in adolescents and young adults: A systematic review.Tobacco use insights · 2024Review
- Pharmacological intervention of nicotine dependence.BioMed research international · 2013Review
- Review
- Therapy for specific problems: youth tobacco cessation.Annual review of psychology · 2009Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThis study tested the efficacy of nicotine patches in combination with behavioural therapy for the treatment of adolescent spit tobacco addiction. Prior interventions had resulted in mean cessation rates below 15% at one year.
methodsThis study, the PATCH Project, used a three group, placebo controlled, randomised clinical trial design. The control group received a standard 3-5 minute counselling followed by a two week follow up phone call. The two intervention groups received a six week behavioural intervention; in addition, one group received active nicotine patches while the other group received placebo patches. Both groups received quarterly stage based telephone counselling.
resultsAt one year, the usual care group's spit tobacco cessation rate was 11.4% (exact 95% confidence interval (CI) 6.1% to 19.1%), placebo patch 25.0% (95% CI 16.9% to 34.7%), and the active patch 17.3% (95% CI 10.4% to 26.3%). When both patch groups were combined, the cessation rate was 21.2% (95% CI 15.7% to 27.6%). The cessation rates for active and placebo patch were not significantly different (exact two sided p = 0.22), while the combined patch groups had a significantly greater cessation rate than usual care (exact two sided p = 0.04).
conclusionsThe behavioural intervention proved to be about twice as successful as previous interventions, but the nicotine patch offered no improvement in cessation rates. The behavioural intervention is based on publicly available materials and can be easily adapted for widespread use, particularly in high schools.
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.