ArticlePilot and feasibility studies2016
Protecting children from secondhand smoke: a mixed-methods feasibility study of a novel smoke-free home intervention.
Article in Pilot and feasibility studies, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a community-based smoke-free-home intervention with or without indoor-air-quality feedback in Bangladesh (MCLASS II): a three-arm, cluster-randomised, controlled trial.The Lancet. Global health · 2021Trial
- A randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention to reduce children's exposure to secondhand smoke in the home.Tobacco control · 2018Trial
- Using In-Home Air Quality Monitoring to Reduce Cannabis Secondhand Smoke Exposure in Children: Quantitative Pilot Feasibility Study.JMIR formative research · 2026Article
- Second-Hand Tobacco Smoke Exposure and Smoke-Free Environments in Ethiopia: A Scoping Review and Narrative Synthesis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
- 'They only smoke in the house when I'm not in': understanding the limited effectiveness of a smoke-free homes intervention.Journal of public health (Oxford, England) · 2021Article
- Supporting Parents Living in Disadvantaged Areas of Edinburgh to Create a Smoke-Free Home Using Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT): A Two-Phase Qualitative Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Development of a Smoke-Free Homes Intervention for Parents: An Intervention Mapping Approach.Health psychology bulletin · 2019Article
- Monitoring secondhand tobacco smoke remotely in real-time: A simple low-cost approach.Tobacco induced diseases · 2019Article
- Article
- Using air quality monitoring to reduce second-hand smoke exposure in homes: The AFRESH feasibility study.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGlobally, 40 % of children under 14 years are regularly exposed to secondhand smoke (SHS), typically in their homes. There is limited evidence of the effectiveness of interventions to reduce children's SHS exposure, and so the aim of this study was to test the feasibility and acceptability of a novel intervention to help parents and carers (caregivers) to reduce their children's exposure to SHS at home.
methodsA novel multi-component intervention to support caregivers to reduce their children's SHS exposure at home was tested in a two-phase feasibility study. The 12-week intensive intervention delivered in the home consisted of three components: behavioural support, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for temporary abstinence and feedback on levels of SHS exposure in the form of children's salivary cotinine (phase 1) or home air quality (PM
resultsTwelve caregivers completed the study, all received personalised feedback on SHS exposure and behavioural support to help them to make their homes smoke-free and the majority at least tried NRT. Saliva cotinine results were variable in phase 1, and therefore, measures of PM
conclusionsRecruiting disadvantaged caregivers was labour intensive, but once recruited, this novel intervention was both feasible and acceptable in supporting caregivers to reduce their children's exposure to SHS at home. It is appropriate to test the efficacy of this novel intervention in an exploratory randomised controlled trial.
trial registrationThis is not applicable for the current study; however, a registered exploratory randomised controlled trial linked to this manuscript is currently ongoing (ISRCTN81701383).
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.