ArticleBMJ open2017
Economic evaluation of a brief counselling for smoking cessation in dentistry: a case study comparing two health economic models.
Article in BMJ open, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 3 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Breaking the habit: a systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of non-pharmacological and combined interventions for smoking cessation in Europe.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Pooled it
- Identifying best modelling practices for tobacco control policy simulations: a systematic review and a novel quality assessment framework.Tobacco control · 2023Pooled it
- Motivational support intervention to reduce smoking and increase physical activity in smokers not ready to quit: the TARS RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2023Pooled it
- The PHEM-B toolbox of methods for incorporating the influences on Behaviour into Public Health Economic Models.BMC public health · 2024Article
- Cost-effectiveness of a high-intensity versus a low-intensity smoking cessation intervention in a dental setting: long-term follow-up.BMJ open · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness estimates of a brief counselling of smoking cessation in dentistry by using two different health economic models. DESIGN AND OUTCOME MEASURES: Intervention effectiveness was estimated in a cluster randomised controlled trial. The number of quitters was estimated based on 7-day abstinence and on smoking reduction at follow-up. Health economic evaluation was performed using two models: (1) a population-based model employing potential impact fractions and (2) a Markov model estimating the cost-effectiveness of the intervention for the actual participants. The evaluation was performed from healthcare and societal perspectives, and health gains were expressed in quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).
settingDental clinics in Sweden.
participants205 Swedish smokers aged 20-75 years.
interventionsA brief, structured behavioural intervention was compared with 'usual care'.
resultsThe cost per quitter was US$552 in the intervention and US$522 in the 'usual care' condition. The net saving estimated with the population-based model was US$17.3 million for intervention and US$49.9 million for 'usual care', with health gains of 1428 QALYs and 2369 QALYs, respectively, for the whole Swedish population during 10 years. The intervention was thus dominated by 'usual care'. The reverse was true when using the Markov model, showing net societal savings of US$71 000 for the intervention and US$57000 for 'usual care', with gains of 5.42 QALYs and 4.74 QALYs, respectively, for lifelong quitters.
conclusionThe comparison of intervention and 'usual care' derived from small-scale studies may be highly sensitive to the choice of the model used to calculate cost-effectiveness.
trial registrationThe cluster randomised trial is registered in the ISRCTN register of controlled trials with identification number ISRCTN50627997.
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.