Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28844012›Full record

ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2017

Smoking-related outcomes and associations with tobacco-free policy in addiction treatment, 2015-2016.

Joseph Guydish, Deborah Yip, Thao Le, Noah R Gubner, Kevin Delucchi, Paul Roman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Pilot Tobacco Treatment Intervention for Women in Residential Treatment for Substance Use Disorder.Journal of obstetric, gynecologic, and neonatal nursing : JOGNN · 2018
    Article
  14. 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.

Joseph GuydishPhilip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, 3333 California St., Ste. 265, San Francisco, CA 94118, United States. Electronic address: joseph.guydish@ucsf.edu.
Deborah YipPhilip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, 3333 California St., Ste. 265, San Francisco, CA 94118, United States.
Thao LePhilip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, 3333 California St., Ste. 265, San Francisco, CA 94118, United States.
Noah R GubnerPhilip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California San Francisco, 3333 California St., Ste. 265, San Francisco, CA 94118, United States.
Kevin DelucchiDepartment of Psychiatry, University of California San Francisco, 401 Parnassus Ave., San Francisco, CA 94143, United States.
Paul RomanCenter for Research on Behavioral Health and Human Service Delivery, Owens Institute for Behavioral Research, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, United States.

Funding

TREATMENTS FOR COMPLEX PATIENTS IN NEW SETTINGSP50DA009253 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI DELUCCHI, KEVIN L. · 1994 to 2014
$28.2M
Marketing, FDA communication, tobacco perceptions and use in addiction treatmentR01DA036066 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI GUYDISH, JOSEPH R · 2013 to 2016
$3.0M
NIDA NIH HHS P50 DA009253NIDA NIH HHS R01 DA036066
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study assessed changes in smoking-related outcomes in two cross-sectional samples of clients enrolled in addiction treatment and whether tobacco-free grounds policies were associated with smoking-related outcomes.

methodClients in 25 programs were surveyed in 2015 (N=1176) and 2016 (N=1055). The samples were compared on smoking prevalence, cigarettes per day (CPD), thinking of quitting, past year quit attempts, staff and clients smoking together, attitudes towards quitting, and tobacco-related services. Second, programs with (n=6) and without (n=17) tobacco-free grounds at both time points were compared on smoking-related outcomes. Last, we examined changes in these measures for two programs that adopted tobacco-free grounds between 2015 and 2016.

resultsThere was one difference across years, such that the mean score for the tobacco Program Service scale increased from 2.37 to 2.48 (p=0.043, effect size=0.02). In programs with tobacco-free grounds policies, compared to those without, both CPD and the rate of staff and clients smoking together were significantly lower. In the two programs where tobacco-free grounds were implemented during study years, client smoking prevalence decreased (92.5% v. 67.6%, p=0.005), the rate of staff and clients smoking together decreased (35.6% v. 4.2%, p=0.031), mean CPD decreased (10.62v. 8.24, p<0.001) and mean tobacco services received by clients increased (2.08v. 3.05, p<0.001).

conclusionAddiction treatment programs, and agencies responsible for licensing, regulating and funding these programs, should implement tobacco-free grounds policies.

Indexed as

AttitudeBehavior, AddictiveCross-Sectional StudiesHealth PolicyHumansSmokingSurveys and QuestionnairesTobacco SmokingDrug treatmentNicotinePolicyTobacco

Identifiers

PMID28844012
PMCPMC5600495

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.