Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34193288›Full record

ArticleAddiction science & clinical practice2021

Smoking cessation using preference-based tools: a mixed method pilot study of a novel intervention among smokers with low socioeconomic position.

Mégane Héron, Anne-Laurence Le Faou, Gladys Ibanez, Brigitte Métadieu, Maria Melchior, Fabienne El-Khoury Lesueur

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Addiction science & clinical practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022
    Pooled it
  4. Trial
  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

6 authors.

Mégane HéronSocial Epidemiology Departement, Sorbonne Université, INSERM UMR_S 1136, Institut Pierre Louis d'Épidémiologie et de Santé Publique IPLESP, 27 rue Chaligny, Paris, 75012, France.
Anne-Laurence Le FaouCentre Ambulatoire d'Addictologie, DMU Psychiatrie et Addictologie, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, APHP.Centre, Paris, France.
Gladys IbanezSocial Epidemiology Departement, Sorbonne Université, INSERM UMR_S 1136, Institut Pierre Louis d'Épidémiologie et de Santé Publique IPLESP, 27 rue Chaligny, Paris, 75012, France.
Brigitte MétadieuAssociation Charonne, Paris, France.
Maria MelchiorSocial Epidemiology Departement, Sorbonne Université, INSERM UMR_S 1136, Institut Pierre Louis d'Épidémiologie et de Santé Publique IPLESP, 27 rue Chaligny, Paris, 75012, France.
Fabienne El-Khoury LesueurSocial Epidemiology Departement, Sorbonne Université, INSERM UMR_S 1136, Institut Pierre Louis d'Épidémiologie et de Santé Publique IPLESP, 27 rue Chaligny, Paris, 75012, France. fabienne.khoury@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0002-6915-6850

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCompared to smokers with favorable socio-economic position (SEP), those with low SEP are less likely to have a successful smoking cessation attempt. Tailored approaches are therefore needed, and general practitioners could help reaching and assisting usually hard-to-reach population.

methodSTOP (Sevrage Tabagique à l'aide d'Outils dédiés selon la Préférence) is a pilot study, examining the feasibility, acceptability and potentiality of a smoking cessation intervention centered on smoker's preference. Smokers with low SEP, wishing to quit, were recruited in six healthcare centers in the Greater Paris area. They were asked to choose between different types of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products and/or e-cigarette with liquids delivered free of charge to aid their smoking cessation attempt. We describe the characteristics of recruited participants, their perception of smoking cessation aids, and the evolution of their smoking status 4 to 6 weeks after recruitment.

resultsWe recruited 49 participants, of which 29% chose an e-cigarette, 29% chose NRT and 42% chose both an e-cigarette and NRT. The intervention was shown to be acceptable by participants and health professionals. Among the 24 participants followed for at least one month, 14 (28% of all participants) stopped smoking, and 9 (18%) considerably reduced their consumption.

conclusionThe STOP intervention is feasible and acceptable, even if more efforts should be made to limit lost-to-follow-up. This preference-based intervention also shows interesting prospect in helping smokers with low SEP quit smoking. We will test the efficacy of this preference-based intervention in a randomized controlled trial.

Indexed as

Electronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsSmoking CessationDelivery of Health CareHumansPilot ProjectsSmokersSocioeconomic FactorsTobacco Use Cessation DevicesElectronic cigaretteHealth disparitiesNRTPilot studySmoking cessation

Identifiers

PMID34193288
PMCPMC8243481

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.