ArticleBone marrow transplantation2014
Accuracy of self-reported tobacco use status among hematopoietic SCT patients.
Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of smoking on outcomes of hematopoietic cell transplantation: a systemic review and future directions.Bone marrow transplantation · 2019Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Tobacco use is a risk factor for adverse outcomes among hematopoietic SCT (HSCT) patients. Accurate identification of tobacco use offers a vital opportunity to treat this risk factor. The current study compared self-reported tobacco use status with serum cotinine levels among HSCT patients at the time of pre-transplant evaluation. A total of 444 participants completed both assessments; 44 participants (9.9%) were classified as tobacco users with serum cotinine concentrations >2 ng/mL vs 29 with self-reporting. Sensitivity and specificity of self-reporting were 65.9% and 100%, respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 100% and 96.4%, respectively. Comparing tobacco use documented in the medical record with cotinine, sensitivity and specificity were 51.2% and 99.2%, respectively. Factors associated with tobacco use were male gender, single relationship status, less education and younger age. In summary, utilization of serum cotinine assays increased detection of tobacco use cases >50% over self-reporting. Results are discussed in the context of translation to care, including clinical and ethical implications, and current tobacco use treatment guidelines. When cotinine assays are not available, self-reporting of any tobacco use in the year before HSCT should trigger brief advice and cessation or relapse prevention counseling.
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.