Trial reportDrug and alcohol dependence2016
Gender differences in snus versus nicotine gum for cigarette avoidance among a sample of US smokers.
Trial report in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- A systematic meta-epidemiologic review on nonabstinence-inclusive interventions for substance use: inclusion of race/ethnicity and sex assigned at birth/gender.The American journal of drug and alcohol abuse · 2024Pooled it
- Intention to purchase alternative tobacco products as a function of smoking status and responses to advertising, packaging, and sensory experiences.Addictive behaviors · 2022Article
- Effectiveness and Safety Profile of Alternative Tobacco and Nicotine Products for Smoking Reduction and Cessation: A Systematic Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionWomen are more susceptible to the harmful effects of cigarette smoking. Thus, identifying effective harm reduction approaches for women is necessary. The goal of this project was to examine gender differences in response to snus versus nicotine gum for cigarette avoidance, as a means of harm reduction.
methodsParticipants were randomly assigned to use snus or nicotine gum as a method to avoid cigarette smoking. Participants attended clinic visits to receive study product, as well as provide biological samples to assess smoking avoidance and biomarkers and report on use of study product and cigarettes. A secondary analysis comparing men and women by randomization to study product was conducted.
resultsParticipants (n=391; 47% women) were randomized into the snus group (n=196; 45% women) and the gum group (n=195; 49% women). Men used more snus whereas women used more gum (p=0.02). During treatment, men in the snus group had higher total nicotine equivalent values whereas women did not vary by group (p=0.03). Overall, fewer men in the snus group completely avoided cigarettes compared to men in the gum group (e.g., continuous abstinence at Week 12: odds ratio=0.43, 95% confidence interval=0.20-0.93). Among women, there were no differences by randomization in cigarette avoidance.
conclusionsDespite a number of gender differences in response to snus versus nicotine gum, these data suggest that snus may not be an optimal harm reduction approach for either gender.
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.