Trial reportPloS one2023
Effect of quitting immediately vs progressively on smoking cessation for smokers at emergency department in Hong Kong: A posteriori analysis of a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02660957 (Effectiveness of a Brief, Self-determination Intervention for Smoking Cessation), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Effectiveness of a Brief, Self-determination Intervention for Smoking Cessation (Immediate or Progressive) Among People Attending Emergency Departments: a Randomised Controlled Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Smoking trends in Poland (2012-2021)-insights from the comprehensive cardiovascular risk prevention program.Frontiers in public health · 2025Observational
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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA progressive approach to quitting smoking has been a popular strategy for motivating smokers who are reluctant to quit. However, whether this strategy can effectively achieve complete cessation or is as successful as quitting immediately remains unresolved. This study aimed to determine whether quitting immediately or progressively was more effective in achieving complete cessation among smokers in Hong Kong who presented at emergency departments. METHODS AND
findingsA posteriori analysis of a single-blinded, multicenter, randomized controlled trial was performed. The original trials was conducted at emergency departments of four major acute hospitals in different districts of Hong Kong. In total, 1571 smokers 18 years or older who presented at 4 major emergency departments between July 4, 2015 and March 17, 2017 were randomized into an intervention group (n = 787) and a control group (n = 784). The intervention group received brief advice (about 1 minute) and could choose their own quit schedules (immediate or progressive, labeled QI and QP, respectively). The control group received a smoking cessation leaflet. Follow-ups were conducted at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcomes, by intention-to-treat, were biochemically validated abstinence between the QI subgroup and control group; between the QP subgroup and control group, and between the QI subgroup and QP subgroup at 6 months. After the propensity sore matching, the biochemically validated abstinence was statistically significantly higher in the QI subgroup than the control group at 6 months (12.1% vs 3.4%, P = 0.003; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 4.34, 95% CI 1.63-11.52) and higher in the QP subgroup than the control group at 6 months (9.8% vs 3.4%, P = 0.02; aORs 2.95, 95% CI: 1.04-8.39). No statistically significant differences of biochemically validated abstinence at both 6 month (12.1% vs 9.8%, P = 0.49; aORs 1.50, 95% CI: 0.71-3.19) were found in the comparison between QI and QP subgroups.
conclusionsThis study demonstrates that the strategy of quitting progressively is effective, especially for smokers who lack motivation or find it difficult to quit. If adopted routinely, such an approach can help achieve a greater level of smoking abstinence in the community.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02660957.
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.