Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22429454›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2012

Smoking and health-related quality of life in English general population: implications for economic evaluations.

Matthias Vogl, Christina M Wenig, Reiner Leidl, Subhash Pokhrel

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
42.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

73 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 160 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Cost-effectiveness of enhancing a Quit-and-Win smoking cessation program for college students.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2018
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Cost-Effectiveness of Integrating Tobacco Cessation Into Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Treatment.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2016
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Implementing a smoke-free generation policy for Canada: estimates of the long-term impacts.Health promotion and chronic disease prevention in Canada : research, policy and practice · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Health-related quality of life and associated factors in elderly individuals with dyslipidemia in rural Northern China.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
  19. Wellbeing in Addiction Recovery: Does It Differ across Addictions?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  20. Article

13 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Matthias VoglHelmholtz Zentrum München, German Research Centre for Environmental Health, Member of the German Centre for Lung Research, Institute of Health Economics and Health Care Management, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany.
Christina M Wenig
Reiner Leidl
Subhash Pokhrel
Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEBrunel University of London · GBHelmholtz Zentrum München · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundLittle is known as to how health-related quality of life (HRQoL) when measured by generic instruments such as EQ-5D differ across smokers, ex-smokers and never-smokers in the general population; whether the overall pattern of this difference remain consistent in each domain of HRQoL; and what implications this variation, if any, would have for economic evaluations of tobacco control interventions.

methodsUsing the 2006 round of Health Survey for England data (n = 13,241), this paper aims to examine the impact of smoking status on health-related quality of life in English population. Depending upon the nature of the EQ-5D data (i.e. tariff or domains), linear or logistic regression models were fitted to control for biology, clinical conditions, socio-economic background and lifestyle factors that an individual may have regardless of their smoking status. Age- and gender-specific predicted values according to smoking status are offered as the potential 'utility' values to be used in future economic evaluation models.

resultsThe observed difference of 0.1100 in EQ-5D scores between never-smokers (0.8839) and heavy-smokers (0.7739) reduced to 0.0516 after adjusting for biological, clinical, lifestyle and socioeconomic conditions. Heavy-smokers, when compared with never-smokers, were significantly more likely to report some/severe problems in all five domains--mobility (67%), self-care (70%), usual activity (42%), pain/discomfort (46%) and anxiety/depression (86%). 'Utility' values by age and gender for each category of smoking are provided to be used in the future economic evaluations.

conclusionSmoking is significantly and negatively associated with health-related quality of life in English general population and the magnitude of this association is determined by the number of cigarettes smoked. The varying degree of this association, captured through instruments such as EQ-5D, may need to be fed into the design of future economic evaluations where the intervention being evaluated affects (e.g. tobacco control) or is affected (e.g. treatment for lung cancer) by individual's (or patients') smoking status.

Indexed as

Quality of LifeEnglandFemaleHumansMaleSmokingValue of Life

Identifiers

PMID22429454
PMCPMC3352300
OpenAlexW2159030880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.