Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33786362›Full record

ArticleAddictive behaviors reports2021

Comparing two approaches to remote biochemical verification of self-reported cessation in very low-income smokers.

Rachel Garg, Amy McQueen, Jennifer Wolff, Taylor Butler, Tess Thompson, Charlene Caburnay, Matthew W Kreuter

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addictive behaviors reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. A Scoping Review and Meta-analysis of the Use of Remote Biochemical Verification Methods of Smoking Status in Tobacco Research.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rachel GargHealth Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, St. Louis, MO 63130, United States.
Amy McQueenHealth Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, St. Louis, MO 63130, United States.
Jennifer WolffHealth Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, St. Louis, MO 63130, United States.
Taylor ButlerHealth Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, St. Louis, MO 63130, United States.
Tess ThompsonHealth Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, St. Louis, MO 63130, United States.
Charlene CaburnayHealth Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, St. Louis, MO 63130, United States.
Matthew W KreuterHealth Communication Research Laboratory, Brown School, Washington University in St. Louis, 1 Brookings Dr, St. Louis, MO 63130, United States.
Washington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Helping the Poor Quit Smoking: Specialized Quitlines and Meeting Basic NeedsR01CA201429 · NCI · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI KREUTER, MATTHEW W. · 2016 to 2021
$3.2M
NCI NIH HHS R01 CA201429
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Little is known about the acceptability and use of remote biochemical verification of self-reported cessation among low-income and racially diverse smokers. We compared responses to an in-person carbon monoxide breath test and in-home urine cotinine test among 270 adults who reported 7-day continuous abstinence at 6-month follow-up in a community-based randomized cessation trial. Half of participants (50%) reported annual household income below $10,000, one in four (28%) had not completed high school, and 69% were Black or African American. Regardless of whether the two tests were offered separately, sequentially, or as a head-to-head choice, participants were more likely to accept an offer to take the urine test than the breath test (89% vs. 32%), and complete it (46% vs. 13%). The proportion of participants completing the urine test and returning a digital photo of the test result is comparable to several studies completed with less disadvantaged samples. Self-report was confirmed by urine test for 74% of participants with a conclusive test result, although a high percentage (39%) of test results were inconclusive. In-home urine testing appears both acceptable and feasible for many low-income smokers, but challenges with testing technology and response rates currently limit its value to increase confidence in self-reports.

Indexed as

Biochemical verificationCotinineLow-incomeMinority healthSmoking cessation

Identifiers

PMID33786362
PMCPMC7988487
OpenAlexW3136349758

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.