Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27613926›Full record

Observational studyNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2016

Structured Smoking Cessation Training for Medical Students: A Prospective Study.

Ronja Herold, Sarah Schiekirka, Jamie Brown, Alex Bobak, Andy McEwen, Tobias Raupach

Open access · hybridAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Tobacco Cessation Curriculum in Medical Schools: a Scoping Review.Journal of cancer education : the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Education · 2023
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Considering Systemic Barriers to Treating Tobacco Use in Clinical Settings in the United States.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2019
    Review
  17. Article
  18. 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

6 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Ronja HeroldDepartment of Cardiology and Pneumology, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Sarah SchiekirkaDivision of Medical Education Research and Curriculum Development, University Medical Centre Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Jamie BrownCancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, University College London, London, UK.
Alex BobakWandsworth Medical Centre, London, UK.
Andy McEwenNational Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training, London, UK.
Tobias Raupach
Action on Smoking and Health · GBUniversitätsmedizin Göttingen · DEUniversity College London · GBUniversity of Göttingen · DE

Funding

Cancer Research UK C1417/A14135
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPhysician adherence to guideline recommendations regarding the provision of counseling and support for smokers willing to quit is low. A lack of training during undergraduate medical education has been identified as a potential cause. This prospective intervention study evaluated a novel teaching module for medical students.

methodsAs part of a 6-week cardiovascular course, 125 fourth-year undergraduate medical students received a multimodal and interactive teaching module on smoking cessation, including online learning material, lectures, seminars, and practical skills training. Short- and medium-term effects on knowledge, skills, attitudes, and self-reported practice were measured using written examinations and an objective structured clinical examination at the end of the module and 6 months later. Results were compared to data obtained from a historical control cohort (n = 70) unexposed to the intervention.

resultsAt the 6-month follow-up, scores in the knowledge test were significantly higher in the intervention than the control group (61.1% vs. 51.7%; p < .001). A similar pattern was observed in the objective structured clinical examination (71.5% vs. 60.5%; p < .001). More students in the intervention than control group agreed that smoking was a chronic disease (83.1% vs. 68.1%; p = .045). The control group was more likely to report recording smoking status (p = .018), but no group difference was detected regarding the report of advising to quit (p = .154).

conclusionsA novel teaching module for undergraduate medical students produced a sustained learning outcome in terms of knowledge, skills, and attitudes but not self-reported practice. IMPLICATIONS: Studies across the world have identified considerable knowledge gaps and deficits in practical training with regard to smoking cessation counseling in undergraduate medical students. This paper describes a teaching intervention informed by current recommendations for the design of educational activities aimed at enabling medical students to deliver adequate behavior change counseling. The teaching module was tailored to the needs of a specific healthcare system. Given its effectiveness as demonstrated in this prospective study, a rollout of this intervention in medical schools might have the potential to substantially improve medical students' knowledge, skills, and attitudes in relation to smoking cessation counseling.

Indexed as

Clinical CompetenceSmoking CessationAdultCounselingCurriculumEducation, Medical, UndergraduateFemaleGermanyHumansMaleProgram EvaluationProspective StudiesStudents, Medical

Identifiers

PMID27613926
PMCPMC5103940
OpenAlexW2511697394

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.