Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28095827›Full record

Trial reportBMC public health2017

Lessons learned from the London Exercise and Pregnant (LEAP) Smokers randomised controlled trial process evaluation: implications for the design of physical activity for smoking cessation interventions during pregnancy.

Nikoletta Giatras, Elisabeth Wanninkhof, Miranda Leontowitsch, Beth Lewis, Adrian Taylor, Sue Cooper, Michael Ussher

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC public health, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Exercise interventions for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  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 at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Nikoletta GiatrasCity University London, Cass Business School, 106 Bunhill Row, London, EC1Y 8TZ, UK.
Elisabeth WanninkhofSt George's University of London, Population Health Research Institute, Cranmer Terrace, London, SW17 0RE, UK.
Miranda LeontowitschInterdisciplinary Ageing Research, Department of Education, Goethe University, Frankfurt am Main, 60323, Germany.
Beth LewisSchool of Kinesiology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
Adrian TaylorPlymouth University Peninsula Schools of Medicine and Dentistry, Plymouth, Devon, UK.
Sue CooperDivision of Primary Care, The University of Nottingham, School of Medicine, University Park, Nottingham, NG7 2RD, UK.
Michael UssherSt George's University of London, Population Health Research Institute, Cranmer Terrace, London, SW17 0RE, UK. mussher@sgul.ac.uk.
St George's, University of London · GBCity, University of London · GBGoethe University Frankfurt · DEPeninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry · GBUniversity of Minnesota · USUniversity of Nottingham · GB

Funding

Department of Health 07/01/14
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe challenges of delivering interventions for pregnant smokers have been poorly documented. Also, the process of promoting a physical activity intervention for pregnant smokers has not been previously recorded. This study describes the experiences of researchers conducting a randomised controlled trial of physical activity as an aid to smoking cessation during pregnancy and explores how the effectiveness of future interventions could be improved.

methodsTwo focus groups, with independent facilitators, were conducted with six researchers who had enrolled pregnant smokers in the LEAP trial, provided the interventions, and administered the research measures. Topics included recruitment, retention and how the physical activity intervention for pregnant smokers was delivered and how it was adapted when necessary to suit the women. The focus groups were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and subjected to thematic analysis.

resultsFive themes emerged related to barriers or enablers to intervention delivery: (1) nature of the intervention; (2) personal characteristics of trial participants; (3) practical issues; (4) researchers' engagement with participants; (5) training and support needs. Researchers perceived that participants may have been deterred by the intensive and generic nature of the intervention and the need to simultaneously quit smoking and increase physical activity. Women also appeared hampered by pregnancy ailments, social deprivation, and poor mental health. Researchers observed that their status as health professionals was valued by participants but it was challenging to maintain contact with participants. Training and support needs were identified for dealing with pregnant teenagers, participants' friends and family, and post-natal return to smoking.

conclusionsFuture exercise interventions for smoking cessation in pregnancy may benefit by increased tailoring of the intervention to the characteristics of the women, including their psychological profile, socio-economic background, pregnancy ailments and exercise preferences. Delivering an effective physical activity intervention for smoking cessation in pregnancy may require more comprehensive training for those delivering the intervention, particularly with regard to dealing with teenage smokers and smokers' friends and family, as well as for avoiding post-natal return to smoking.

trial registrationISRCTN48600346 , date of registration: 21/07/2008.

Indexed as

AdultExerciseFemaleHealth PromotionHumansIntentionLondonPregnancyPregnancy ComplicationsPrenatal CareSmokingSmoking CessationTobacco Use DisorderYoung AdultExercisePhysical activity interventionPregnant smokersProcess evaluationQualitativeResearchers’ perspectiveSmoking cessation

Identifiers

PMID28095827
PMCPMC5240296
OpenAlexW2572021430

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.