Trial reportAddictive behaviors2018
Proactive tobacco treatment for individuals with and without a mental health diagnosis: Secondary analysis of a pragmatic randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Addictive behaviors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00608426 (Proactive Tobacco Treatment for Diverse Veteran Smokers), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Proactive Tobacco Treatment for Diverse Veteran Smokers
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Proactive tobacco treatment for veterans with posttraumatic stress disorder.Psychological trauma : theory, research, practice and policy · 2021Trial
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
introductionIndividuals with (vs. without) mental illness use tobacco at higher rates and have more difficulty quitting. Treatment models for smokers with mental illness are needed.
methodsThis secondary analysis of the Victory Over Tobacco study [a pragmatic randomized clinical trial (N=5123) conducted in 2009-2011 of Proactive Care (proactive outreach plus connection to smoking cessation services) vs. Usual Care] tests the effectiveness of treatment assignment in participants with and without a mental health diagnosis on population-level, 6month prolonged abstinence at one year follow-up.
resultsAnalyses conducted in 2015-6 found that there was no interaction between treatment group and mental health group on abstinence (F(1,3300=1.12, p=0.29)). Analyses stratified by mental health group showed that those without mental illness, assigned to Proactive Care, had a significantly higher population-level abstinence rate than those assigned to Usual Care (OR=1.40, 95% CI=1.17-1.67); in those with mental illness, assignment to Proactive Care produced a non-significant increase in abstinence compared to Usual Care (OR=1.18, 95% CI=0.98-1.41). Those with mental illness reported more medical visits, cessation advice and treatment (p<0.001), similar levels of abstinence motivation (p>0.05), but lower abstinence self-efficacy (p<0.001).
conclusionsThose with a mental health diagnosis benefitted less from proactive outreach regarding tobacco use. VA primary care patients with mental illness may not need additional outreach because they are connected to cessation resources during medical appointments. This group may also require more intensive cessation interventions targeting self-efficacy to improve cessation rates. Clinicaltrials.gov registration # NCT00608426.
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.