ArticleCancer2018
Perspectives of Chinese American smoker and nonsmoker household pairs about the creating smokefree living together program.
Article in Cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tobacco cessation interventions in high-income countries with Chinese, Vietnamese and Arab people who smoke: a scoping review of outcomes and cultural considerations.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Tiwala, Gaining Trust to Recruit Filipino American Families: CARE-T2D Study.Ethnicity & disease · 2022Article
- Home Smoking Bans and Urinary NNAL Levels to Measure Tobacco Smoke Exposure in Chinese American Household Pairs.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Article
- Family Involvement in Asian American Health Interventions: A Scoping Review and Conceptual Model.Public health reports (Washington, D.C. : 1974)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundChinese men smoke at high rates, and this puts household members at risk for tobacco-related diseases. Culturally responsive interventions that provide education and support are needed to promote smokefree living and reduce smoke exposure, particularly for US immigrants who experience changes in smokefree social norms. This qualitative study examines perspectives of Chinese American smoker and nonsmoker household pairs in the Creating Smokefree Living Together program.
methodsFour focus groups were conducted with 30 Chinese American participants (15 smokers and 15 nonsmokers) who, in household pairs, completed smokefree education interventions of either brief or moderate intensity. Nearly three-quarters of the smokers continued to smoke after the intervention at the time of focus group participation. All smokers were male, and most household nonsmokers were female spouses. All participants had limited English proficiency. Focus group meetings were recorded, and the recordings were translated and transcribed. Transcripts and field notes were thematically analyzed.
resultsThe following themes, shared by smokers and nonsmokers across interventions, were identified: 1) there was a preference for dyadic and group interventions because of the support offered, 2) increased knowledge of the health harms of smoke exposure within a pair improved the nonsmoker's support for smokefree living, 3) learning communication strategies improved household relationships and assertiveness for smokefree environments, 4) biochemical feedback was useful but had short-term effects, and 5) project magnets provided cues to action.
conclusionsInvolving household partners is critical to smokefree interventions. Simple reminders at home appear to be more powerful than personal biochemical feedback of smoke exposure for sustaining motivation and engagement in ongoing behavioral changes within the household. Cancer 2018;124:1599-606. © 2018 American Cancer Society.
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.