Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24745639›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of preventive medicine2014

Evaluation of a mass media campaign promoting using help to quit smoking.

Laura A Gibson, Sarah A Parvanta, Michelle Jeong, Robert C Hornik

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of preventive medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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.

Laura A GibsonCenter of Excellence in Cancer Communication Research, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: lgibson@asc.upenn.edu.
Sarah A ParvantaCenter of Excellence in Cancer Communication Research, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Michelle JeongCenter of Excellence in Cancer Communication Research, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Robert C HornikCenter of Excellence in Cancer Communication Research, Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Funding

CATEGORY B: COMMUNITIES PUTTING PREVENTION TO WORKU58DP002633 · DP · PHILADELPHIA DEPARTMENTOF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI MALLYA, GIRIDHAR · 2010 to 2010
$10.4M
Effects of Public Information in Cancer (EPIC Center)P50CA095856 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI HORNIK, ROBERT C. · 2003 to 2007
$10.1M
NCCDPHP CDC HHS 1U58DP002633-01NCCDPHP CDC HHS U58 DP002633NCI NIH HHS P50 CA095856NCI NIH HHS P50CA095856
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough there is evidence that promoting individual cessation aids increases their utilization, mass media campaigns highlighting the benefit of using help to quit have not been evaluated. PURPOSE: The effects of a Philadelphia adult smoking-cessation media campaign targeting using help in ad taglines were analyzed from March to November 2012. This study distinctively analyzed the campaign's impact at both the population level (effects on the average person) and the individual level (effects among those who reported exposure).

methodsThe 16-month mass media campaign aired in Philadelphia PA from December 2010 to March 2012. A representative sample of adult Philadelphia smokers was interviewed by telephone at baseline (n=491) and new samples were interviewed monthly throughout the campaign (n=2,786). In addition, a subsample of these respondents was reinterviewed 3 months later (n=877).

resultsOn average, participants reported seeing campaign ads four times per week. Among individual respondents, each additional campaign exposure per week increased the likelihood of later reporting using help (OR=1.08, p<0.01), adjusting for baseline use of help and other potential confounders. This corresponded to a 5% increase in the use of help for those with average exposure relative to those with no exposure. Cross-sectional associations between individual campaign exposure and intentions to use help were consistent with these lagged findings. However, there was no evidence of population-level campaign effects on use of help.

conclusionsAlthough the campaign was effective at the individual level, its effects were too small to have a population-detectable impact.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAge FactorsConfounding Factors, EpidemiologicCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth PromotionHealth StatusHumansMaleMass MediaMiddle AgedPhiladelphiaSex FactorsSmokingSmoking Cessation

Identifiers

PMID24745639
PMCPMC4023347

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.