ArticleJournal of addiction medicine
Impact of Nicotine Replacement Therapy Sampling on Cessation-Related Processes.
Article in Journal of addiction medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesSmoking prevalence remains high among low-income smokers. Understanding processes (eg, withdrawal, craving, motivation) in early smoking cessation is crucially important for designing effective interventions for this population.
methodsThis is a secondary analysis of a novel, in-session sampling intervention (ie, In Vivo) as compared with standard care behavioral smoking cessation counseling (SC) among community-dwelling low-income smokers (n = 83). This analysis examined the effect of 5 in-session sampling interventions on cessation-related processes and perceived advantages or disadvantages of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) products over time using daily diaries.
resultsThe In Vivo treatment had an early positive impact in terms of decreasing withdrawal symptoms and cravings, and increasing perceived advantages to NRT, with moderate to large effect sizes. Results also showed that the treatment effectively reduced withdrawal symptoms and cravings in-session, with small-to-medium and medium-to-large effect sizes, respectively. In-session reduction of withdrawal symptoms and cravings did not occur for the SC group, with the exception of decreased withdrawal symptoms occurring during week 4. The In Vivo treatment did not impact quit goal, desire to quit, abstinence self-efficacy, perceived difficulty in quitting, motivational engagement, or perceived disadvantages to NRT. The In Vivo group reported less daily cigarette use relative to the SC group, in addition to reporting less cigarette use on days they reported greater combination NRT use.
conclusionsThere is preliminary support for this In Vivo treatment over SC in reducing withdrawal, craving, and the number of cigarettes smoked per day, as well as promoting perceived advantages of NRT among low-income smokers.
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.