ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology2022
Cancer care clinicians' provision of smoking cessation support: A mixed methods study in New South Wales, Australia.
Article in Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology, 2022. 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, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Comparison of Australian Oncology Clinicians' Smoking Cessation Care Practices for People Who Currently Smoke Versus Those Who Report Recently Stopping Smoking.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Smoking Cessation Practices in Australian Oncology Settings: A Cross-Sectional Study of Who, How, and When.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2025Article
- Cancer care clinicians' provision of smoking cessation support: A mixed methods study in New South Wales, Australia.Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesGiven the importance of supporting cancer patients to quit smoking, we sought to ascertain cancer care clinicians' beliefs and practices regarding providing smoking cessation brief interventions.
methodsWe used a cross-sectional sequential explanatory mixed method design, including a survey of multidisciplinary cancer care clinicians and semistructured interviews.
resultsOne hundred and sixty-five cancer care clinicians completed the survey and 21 participated in interviews. Over half of survey respondents (53%) said they do not regularly undertake smoking cessation brief interventions and 40% rarely or never advise quitting. Nonmetropolitan clinicians were more likely to discuss medication options and refer to the Quitline. Physicians were more likely to do brief interventions with patients and radiation therapists were least likely. Barriers were lack of training and experience, lack of knowledge of the Quitline referral process, lack of role clarity, lack of resources and systems, and perceived psychological ramifications of cancer for patients.
conclusionThere is a need to upskill cancer clinicians and improve systems to provide smoking cessation brief interventions as part of routine clinical practice. All cancer care clinicians should complete brief intervention smoking cessation training relevant to the cancer context, including making referrals to Quitline, and be supported by systems to record and follow-up care.
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.