Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25260749›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2016

Effectiveness of a mobile, drop-in stop smoking service in reaching and supporting disadvantaged UK smokers to quit.

Andrea Venn, Anne Dickinson, Rachael Murray, Laura Jones, Jinshuo Li, Steve Parrott, Ann McNeill

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco control, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

7 authors.

Andrea VennDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Anne DickinsonDivision of Primary Care, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Rachael MurrayDivision of Epidemiology and Public Health and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Laura JonesUnit of Public Health, Epidemiology and Biostatistics and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.
Jinshuo LiDepartment of Health Sciences and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, University of York, York, UK.
Steve ParrottDepartment of Health Sciences and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, University of York, York, UK.
Ann McNeillNational Addiction Centre, Institute of Psychiatry and UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, King's College London, London, UK.

Funding

Department of Health RP-PG-0608-10020Medical Research Council MR/K023195/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn countries where there are large disparities in smoking with persistent high rates among disadvantaged groups, there is a need to ensure that stop smoking services (SSS) reach such smokers. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a mobile, drop-in, community-based SSS in reaching more disadvantaged smokers, particularly those from routine and manual (RM) occupation groups, than standard services; secondary aims were to evaluate effectiveness in reaching those who had not previously accessed SSS, triggering unplanned quit behaviour, helping people quit and cost-effectiveness.

methodsFollowing a 4-week pilot period, a mobile drop-in SSS was delivered across various public locations in Nottingham City, UK for 6 months, offering behavioural and pharmacological support via one-to-one consultations with trained cessation advisors. Detailed demographic and smoking behaviour data were collected from all clients accessing the mobile SSS, and Nottingham's standard SSS for comparison.

resultsCompared with smokers accessing the standard SSS (n=1856), mobile SSS smokers (n=811) were significantly more likely to be from the RM group (33.3% vs 27.2%, p=0.002), and to be first-time SSS users (67.8% vs 59.3%, p<0.001). Nearly 1 in 10 smokers setting a quit date through the mobile SSS had no prior quit intentions. The cost per smoker setting a quit date for the mobile SSS was only slightly higher than the standard SSS (£224 vs £202).

conclusionsA mobile drop-in SSS is an effective way of reaching more disadvantaged smokers from RM occupations, as well as those who have not previously accessed standard SSS and those without prior quit intentions.

Indexed as

Health ServicesSmoking CessationAdultCost-Benefit AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedReferral and ConsultationUnited KingdomCessationHealth ServicesSocioeconomic status

Identifiers

PMID25260749
PMCPMC4720872

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.