Trial reportAddiction (Abingdon, England)2020
Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of a work-place smoking cessation intervention with and without financial incentives.
Trial report in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2020. 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.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Do financial incentives increase mental health treatment engagement? A meta-analysis.Journal of consulting and clinical psychology · 2022Pooled it
- Cost-effectiveness of guideline-based stepped and collaborative care versus treatment as usual for patients with depression - a cluster-randomized trial.BMC psychiatry · 2020Trial
- Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analysis of a work-place smoking cessation intervention with and without financial incentives.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2020Trial
- Promoting healthy behaviour with financial incentives: three challenges and solutions for large scale implementation.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2026Review
- Article
- Financial incentives to stop smoking: Potential financial consequences of different reward schedules.Tobacco prevention & cessation · 2024Article
- Exploring the Incentive Function of Virtual Academic Degrees in a Chinese Online Smoking Cessation Community: Qualitative Content Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Article
- Occupational disease claims and non-occupational morbidity in a prospective cohort observation of nickel electrolysis workers.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- The impact of smoking on periodontal status and dental caries.Tobacco induced diseases · 2022Article
- Cost-Effectiveness of Four Financial Incentive Programs for Smoking Cessation.Annals of the American Thoracic Society · 2021Article
- Active referral plus a small financial incentive upon cessation services use on smoking abstinence: a community-based, cluster-randomised controlled trial.The Lancet regional health. Western Pacific · 2021Article
- Social measures for reducing exposure to secondhand smoke in migrant workers of sugarcane harvest in the lower northern region of Thailand.Tobacco induced diseases · 2021Article
- Implementation of Financial Incentives for Successful Smoking Cessation in Real-Life Company Settings: A Qualitative Needs Assessment among Employers.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019Article
- Effect of Funding Medications for Nicotine Dependence on Tobacco Control: A Narrative Review.Open respiratory archivesReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo perform an economic evaluation of a work-place smoking cessation group training programme with incentives compared with a training programme without incentives.
designA trial-based cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) and cost-utility analysis (CUA) from a societal perspective and an employer's perspective.
settingSixty-one companies in the Netherlands.
participantsA total of 604 tobacco-smoking employees. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: A 7-week work-place smoking cessation group training programme. The intervention group earned gift vouchers of €350 for 12 months' continuous abstinence. The comparator group received no incentives. MEASUREMENTS: Online questionnaires were administered to assess quality of life (EQ-5D-5 L) and resource use during the 14-month follow-up period (2-month training period plus 12-month abstinence period). For the CEA the primary outcome measure was carbon monoxide (CO)-validated continuous abstinence; for the CUA the primary outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALY). Bootstrapping and sensitivity analyses were performed to account for uncertainty. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) tables were used to determine cost-effectiveness from a life-time perspective.
findingsOf the participants in the intervention group, 41.1% had quit smoking compared with 26.4% in the control group. From a societal perspective with a 14-month follow-up period, the ICER per quitter for an intervention with financial incentives compared with no incentives was €11 546. From an employer's perspective, the ICER was €5686. There was no significant difference in QALYs between the intervention and control group within the 14-month follow-up period. The intervention was dominated by the comparator in the primary analysis at a threshold of €20 000 per QALY. In the sensitivity analysis, these results were uncertain. A life-time perspective showed an ICER of €1249 (95% confidence interval = €850-2387) per QALY.
conclusionsFinancial incentives may be cost-effective in increasing quitting smoking, particularly from a life-time perspective.
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.