Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29563220›Full record

ArticleTobacco control2019

Changes in smoking cessation assistance in the European Union between 2012 and 2017: pharmacotherapy versus counselling versus e-cigarettes.

Filippos T Filippidis, Anthony A Laverty, Ute Mons, Carlos Jimenez-Ruiz, Constantine I Vardavas

Open access · hybridAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Tobacco control, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
7.0field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 87 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. [Diversification of smoking cessation programmes-the role of e-cigarettes].Bundesgesundheitsblatt, Gesundheitsforschung, Gesundheitsschutz · 2021
    Review
  20. The Usability of an Online Tool to Promote the Use of Evidence-Based Smoking Cessation Interventions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Filippos T FilippidisPublic Health Policy Evaluation Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2101-2559
Anthony A LavertyPublic Health Policy Evaluation Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Ute MonsCancer Prevention Unit and WHO Collaborating Centre for Tobacco Control, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany.
Carlos Jimenez-RuizSmoking Cessation Service, Community of Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Constantine I VardavasCenter for Health Services Research, School of Medicine, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
German Cancer Research Center · DEImperial College London · GBMayo Clinic · USNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

Department of Health RP 2014-04-032
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe landscape of smoking cessation may have changed in Europe recently.

objectivesTo identify changes in use of smoking cessation assistance in the European Union (EU) and factors associated with use of cessation assistance.

methodsData from the 2012 (n=9921) and 2017 (n=9489) waves of the Eurobarometer survey were used. Self-reported use of smoking cessation assistance was assessed among smokers who had ever tried to quit and former smokers. Changes in use of each type of assistance were assessed using logistic regression.

resultsAmong current and former smokers, those who had ever attempted to quit without assistance increased from 70.3% (2012) to 74.8% (2017). Current smokers were more likely to have used any assistance compared with former smokers (P<0.001). Use of e-cigarettes for smoking cessation assistance increased (3.7% to 9.7%)%), while use of pharmacotherapy (14.6% to 11.1%)%) and smoking cessation services (7.5% to 5.0%)%) declined. Younger people were more likely to have reported e-cigarette use for smoking cessation but less likely to have used a cessation service. Individuals living in countries with comprehensive smoking cessation policies were more likely to have used any cessation assistance (adjusted OR (aOR)=1.78; 95% CI 1.15 to 2.76), pharmacotherapy (aOR=3.44; 95% CI 1.78 to 6.66) and smoking cessation services (aOR=2.27; 95% CI 1.27 to 4.06) compared with those living in countries with weak smoking cessation policies.

conclusionsThese findings highlight the need for approaches that ensure that smokers get support to quit smoking across the EU. The question of whether the availability of e-cigarettes will displace other methods, and the impact of such a displacement, should be closely evaluated.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsAdolescentAdultCounselingEuropean UnionFemaleHumansLogistic ModelsMaleMiddle AgedSelf ReportSmokersSmoking CessationSmoking Cessation AgentsSurveys and QuestionnairesTobacco SmokingSmoking Cessation Agentscessationelectronic nicotine delivery devicesnon-cigarette tobacco products

Identifiers

PMID29563220
PMCPMC6317445
OpenAlexW2790824268

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.