Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34792598›Full record

ArticleNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2022

Potential Explanations for Conflicting Findings on Abrupt Versus Gradual Smoking Cessation: A Population Study in England.

Claire Garnett, Jamie Brown, Lion Shahab, Tobias Raupach, Nicola Lindson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trends in Single and Multiple Noncombustible Nicotine Product Use: A Population Study in England.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2025
    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

5 authors.

Claire GarnettDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-6589-299X
Jamie BrownDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.
Lion ShahabDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-4033-442X
Tobias RaupachDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London, UK.
Nicola LindsonNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-2539-9268

Funding

Cancer Research UK 22962Cancer Research UK C1417/A22962
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionObservational and trial evidence conflict on the efficacy of two contrasting behavioral approaches to quitting smoking-gradual and abrupt. Observational data suggest an abrupt approach to quitting is superior to a gradual approach, whilst trials show no difference. One potential explanation is self-selection in observational data, whereby people can choose their quit approach, and those who find it harder to quit may be more likely to choose a gradual quit approach. This study aims to investigate potential explanations for these conflicting findings. AIMS AND

methodsThis study aims to investigate potential explanations for these conflicting findings. We used observational data from a nationally representative sample of adults in England from November 2006 to February 2020 who reported smoking and had made at least one quit attempt in the past year (n = 21 542). We used logistic regression models to assess the association between abrupt versus gradual quit attempts and quit success, adjusting for sociodemographic, smoking, and quit attempt characteristics.

findingsAbrupt, versus gradual, attempts were associated with improved quit success in an unadjusted model (odds ratio = 2.02, 95% CI = 1.86 to 2.19). This association remained after adjusting for a broad range of relevant confounders (odds ratio = 1.75, 95% CI = 1.59 to 1.93).

conclusionsAmong a representative sample of adults who had smoked and made a quit attempt in the past year, there was evidence of an association between abrupt attempts and quit success before and after adjusting for relevant confounders. This suggests that the differences in quit success seen between abrupt and gradual quit attempt types are not completely driven by self-selection in observational data. IMPLICATIONS: We investigated explanations for conflicting findings on the efficacy of gradual versus abrupt approaches to quitting smoking between trial and observational data. Despite adjusting observational data for sociodemographic, smoking, and quit attempt characteristics, an association between abrupt quitting and quit success remained. Therefore, differences in quit success were not completely driven by the self-selection of a gradual approach by people who found it especially difficult to quit or differences in the use of quitting aids. However, characteristics adjusted for were limited by the data available, and future research should continue to investigate the difference in findings across study types to inform cessation support.

Indexed as

Smoking CessationAdultEnglandHealth BehaviorHumansSmokingTobacco Use Cessation Devices

Identifiers

PMID34792598
PMCPMC8887587

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.