Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26814889›Full record

Trial reportJournal of cancer research and clinical oncology2016

Effect of smoking cessation counseling within a randomised study on early detection of lung cancer in Germany.

M Bade, V Bähr, U Brandt, A Eigentopf, T Brüchert, M-L Gross, E Motsch, N Becker

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of cancer research and clinical oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Guideline
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Lung cancer screening and smoking cessation efforts.Translational lung cancer research · 2021
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

8 authors.

M BadeOutpatient Orthopedics Hospital (ZAR), Ludwigshafen, Germany.
V BährFaculty of Applied Psychology, SRH Hochschule Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
U BrandtPsychiatrisches Zentrum Nordbaden, Wiesloch, Germany.
A EigentopfDivision of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
T BrüchertUniversity of Bremen, Bremen, Germany.
M-L GrossDivision of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
E MotschDivision of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany.
N BeckerDivision of Cancer Epidemiology, German Cancer Research Center, Im Neuenheimer Feld 581, 69120, Heidelberg, Germany. n.becker@dkfz.de.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn the German lung cancer screening trial LUSI, smoking cessation counseling (SCC) was offered to all participants at time of randomization, and smoking habits were asked for within annual questionnaire inquiries. We analyzed the smoking habits of the participants within the first 2 years of follow-up and especially the potential effect of the SCC on these habits. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe used the smoking data of the initial inquiry on which the decision on invitation to the study was based, the socio-economic data of the questionnaire filled-in at time of randomization, the psycho-social data obtained during the SCC, and the annual questionnaire data of the first two annual follow-up screening rounds.

resultsSmoking prevalence decreased in the entire cohort significantly by 4 %, whereby the decrease was with 4.5 % statistically not significantly higher in the control arm than in the screening arm with 3.4 %. The decline was much stronger in the subgroup of attendees to stop-smoking counseling and mounted up therein to 10 %. In some participants, an increase of readiness to quit smoking was observed during the counseling hour, but did not show effects on smoking status 2 years later. DISCUSSION: We did not see a tendency to increased smoking among participants of the intervention arm or the entire study. The decline of smoking prevalence among the attendees of the counseling might be due to self-selection. Since the issue of effectiveness of smoking cessation counseling is important, further research with randomization into offering counseling or no intervention should be taken into consideration.

Indexed as

CounselingAgedEarly Detection of CancerEarly Intervention, EducationalFemaleFollow-Up StudiesGermanyHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedPrevalencePrognosisSmokingSmoking CessationSurveys and QuestionnairesLow-dose CTLUSIMSCTMultislice CTQuit smokingScreening

Identifiers

PMID26814889
PMCPMC11819217

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.