Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30987623›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2019

A 'Cut-Down-To-Stop' intervention for smokers who find it hard to quit: a qualitative evaluation.

J Robinson, A McEwen, R Heah, S Papadakis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Strategies for Referring Cancer Patients in a Smoking Cessation Program.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020
    Observational
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

4 authors.

J RobinsonSchool of Social and Political Sciences, University of Glasgow, Florentine House, 53, Hillhead St, G12 8QS, Glasgow, UK. Jude.Robinson@Glasgow.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5491-4893
A McEwenNational Centre for Smoking Cessation and Training (NCSCT), 1 Great Western Industrial Centre, Dorchester, DT1 1RD, UK.
R HeahDepartment of Law, University of Liverpool, Eleanor Rathbone Building, Bedford Street South, L69 7DT, Liverpool, UK.
S PapadakisSophia Papadakis, Division of Prevention and Rehabilitation, University of Ottawa Heart Institute, 40 Ruskin Street, Ottawa, Ontario, K1Y4W7, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEnglish Stop Smoking Services primarily deliver behavioural interventions to support abrupt quit attempts. Recent evidence suggests an alternative approach could be offered to clients involving a more gradual reduction of cigarettes smoked leading to complete abstinence, known as 'Cut Down To Stop' (CDTS). The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of stop smoking practitioners and service users who participated in a pilot study of a CDTS service.

methodsThe CDTS intervention was pilot tested in a Stop Smoking Service in London, England. As part of the CDTS intervention clients who were still smoking 2 weeks after their quit date were offered tailored advice, medication and support to reduce their current smoking by half, with the aim to stop smoking altogether within a six-month period. A qualitative evaluation was conducted involving a focus group discussion with nine practitioners involved in the delivery of the CDTS intervention and telephone interviews with 18 CDTS service users. Thematic analysis was performed.

resultsService users and practitioners were very positive about their experience with the CDTS intervention. The intervention was found to be an effective way of keeping clients engaged with the service and was felt to increase the likelihood they might quit and/or re-engage in service for future quit attempts. Elements that contributed to the attractiveness of the CDTS intervention included: 1) the trust and empathetic relationship developed between service users, practitioners and their referring primary care provider; 2) time and flexibility for service users to engage in the quitting process at their own pace; 3) setting progressive goals and building service user confidence; 4) the opportunity to experiment with quit smoking medications; and, 5) the on-going contact with the practitioner/service.

conclusionsService users who are not successful with quitting abruptly may benefit from a CDTS intervention. This study highlights the important role of 'relationships', time and 'flexible' service delivery models in engaging service users who are not initially successful with quitting. The findings of this study have the potential to inform decision-making regarding the value of the CDTS approach for the English Stop Smoking Service and cessation services worldwide.

Indexed as

Health BehaviorAdultBehavior TherapyEnglandFemaleHumansLondonMaleMiddle AgedPilot ProjectsReferral and ConsultationSmokersSmokingSmoking CessationCut Down To StopFocus groupsQualitative evaluationSmoking cessationUnited Kingdom

Identifiers

PMID30987623
PMCPMC6466646

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.