ArticleJournal of smoking cessation2018
Patient Cessation Activity after Automatic Referral to a Dedicated Cessation Support Service.
Article in Journal of smoking cessation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Design of a randomized tobacco cessation trial among FDNY World Trade Center responders in a lung cancer screening program.Addiction science & clinical practice · 2025Article
- Integrating Tobacco Use Assessment and Treatment in the Oncology Setting: Quality Improvement Results from the Georgetown Lombardi Smoking Treatment and Recovery Program.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Evaluation of a Dedicated Tobacco Cessation Support Service for Thoracic Cancer Center Patients.Journal of public health management and practice : JPHMPArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionWe characterized tobacco use, cessation patterns, and patient satisfaction with a cessation support program at an NCI Designated Comprehensive Cancer Center following a mandatory tobacco assessment and automatic referral.
methodsA 3-month follow-up survey (via web, paper, or telephone) was administered between March 2013 and November 2013 for all patients referred to and contacted by a cessation support service, and who consented to participation three months prior to administration. Patients were asked about their perceived importance and self-efficacy to quit smoking, quit attempts, and satisfaction with the cessation service.
resultsFifty-two percent (257/499) of patients who participated in the cessation support service, and consented to be contacted again, completed a follow-up survey. Of those who participated, 9.7% were referred to the service as having recently quit tobacco (in the past 30 days) and 23.6% reported having quit at the time of first contact. At the 3-month follow-up, 48.1% reported being smoke-free for the previous seven days. When patients were asked about their experience with the cessation service, 86.4% reported being very or mostly satisfied with the service, and 64.3% reported that their experience with the service increased their satisfaction with the care received at the cancer centre.
conclusionsOur findings suggest that recently diagnosed cancer patients are aware that quitting tobacco is important, are making attempts to quit, and are amenable to an opt-out automatic referral cessation support service as part of their cancer care.
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.