Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16096304›Full record

Trial reportBMJ (Clinical research ed.)2005

Randomised controlled trial of home based motivational interviewing by midwives to help pregnant smokers quit or cut down.

D M Tappin, M A Lumsden, W H Gilmour, F Crawford, D McIntyre, D H Stone, R Webber, S MacIndoe, E Mohammed

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMJ (Clinical research ed.), 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers, 9 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 9 pooled it
5.3field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 9 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Interventions for promoting smoking cessation during pregnancy.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2009
    Pooled it
  9. Contingency Management Versus Psychotherapy for Prenatal Smoking Cessation: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health
    Pooled it
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Motivational interviewing for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Review
  18. Review
  19. The effect of educational programs on hypertension management.International cardiovascular research journal · 2014
    Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

D M TappinPaediatric Epidemiology and Community Health Unit, Department of Child Health, Division of Developmental Medicine, University of Glasgow, Yorkhill, Glasgow G3 8SJ. goda11@udcf.gla.ac.uk
M A Lumsden
W H Gilmour
F Crawford
D McIntyre
D H Stone
R Webber
S MacIndoe
E Mohammed
University of Glasgow · GBPublic Health Scotland · GBStobhill Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine whether motivational interviewing--a behavioural therapy for addictions-provided at home by specially trained midwives helps pregnant smokers to quit.

designRandomised controlled non-blinded trial analysed by intention to treat.

settingClinics attached to two maternity hospitals in Glasgow.

participants762/1684 pregnant women who were regular smokers at antenatal booking: 351 in intervention group and 411 in control group.

interventionsAll women received standard health promotion information. Women in the intervention group were offered motivational interviewing at home. All interviews were recorded.

main outcome measuresSelf reported smoking cessation verified by plasma or salivary cotinine concentration.

results17/351 (4.8%) women in the intervention group stopped smoking (according to self report and serum cotinine concentration < 13.7 ng/ml) compared with 19/411(4.6%) in the control group. Fifteen (4.2%) women in the intervention group cut down (self report and cotinine concentration less than half that at booking) compared with 26 (6.3%) in the control group. Fewer women in the intervention group reported smoking more (18 (5.1%) v 44 (10.7%); relative risk 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.28 to 0.81). Birth weight did not differ significantly (mean 3078 g v 3048 g).

conclusionGood quality motivational interviewing did not significantly increase smoking cessation among pregnant women.

Indexed as

AdultCotinineCounselingFemaleHome Care ServicesHumansMidwiferyMotivationPatient CompliancePregnancyPrenatal CareSalivaSmokingSmoking CessationSmoking PreventionTreatment OutcomeCotinine

Identifiers

PMID16096304
PMCPMC1184246
OpenAlexW2169284829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.