Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39279642›Full record

ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2025

Tailored text-messaging versus standard Quitline telephone counselling for smoking cessation among people who smoke from a low-socio-economic status background in Australia: A study protocol for a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial (The Quit By Phone Study).

Bridget C Howard, Sorcha Donnelly, Hayden McRobbie, Daniel Barker, Dennis Petrie, Emily Stockings, Jamie Brown, Felix Naughton, Robyn Whittaker, Anthony Shakeshaft and 5 more

Abstract readClinical Trial Protocol
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

15 authors.

Bridget C HowardNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0080-4853
Sorcha DonnellyNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0009-0006-3566-2057
Hayden McRobbieNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7777-1845
Daniel BarkerHunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Australia.
Dennis PetrieCentre for Health Economics, Monash Business School, Monash University, Caufield, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3882-2531
Emily StockingsThe Matilda Centre for Research in Mental Health and Substance Use, University of Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-5349-951X
Jamie BrownDepartment of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-2797-5428
Felix NaughtonAddiction Research Group, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-9790-2796
Robyn WhittakerFaculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, New Zealand.
Anthony ShakeshaftUQ Poche Centre for Indigenous Health, University of Queensland, Toowong, Australia.
Kieran PatelNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Jack AndersonNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Dennis ThomasHunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, Australia.
Robert WestInstitute of Epidemiology and Health, University College London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6398-0921
Ryan J CourtneyNational Drug and Alcohol Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-1339-3221

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council Project Grant GNT1162583
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsSignficant inequalities in tobacco smoking exist, with higher smoking rates among people from low-socio-economic status (low-SES) populations. Tailored technology-based programs for low-SES smoking populations have the potential for high reach, but require effectiveness data from large-scale trials. This trial among Australians who smoke from a low-SES background will determine the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of tailored text-message (TTM) support compared with standard Quitline (SQL) telephone support service. DESIGN, SETTING AND

participantsThis is a two-arm, parallel group, randomized, non-inferiority trial with allocation concealment and blinded outcome assessment in an Australian population within the greater Sydney region in New South Wales. Participants are adults who smoke daily (n = 1246), are interested in quitting and currently receiving a government pension or allowance, and will be recruited via advertisements. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: Participants will be randomized (1:1 ratio) to receive either 12 months of TTM quit support or enrolment in SQL telephone support. MEASUREMENTS: Assessments will be completed at baseline (telephone interview), within 1 month (check-in call), at 3 months (on-line questionnaire) and 12 months (telephone interview) post-randomization. The primary outcome will be 6-month continuous abstinence verified by carbon monoxide breath test at 12-month follow-up. The study will test whether TTM is non-inferior to SQL by a non-inferiority margin of 2%, i.e. the quit rate in the TTM group will be no worse than 2% less than the quit rate in the SQL group. Secondary outcomes will include self-reported continuous and point prevalence abstinence and acceptability and cost-effectiveness of TTM versus SQL.

conclusionShould the tailored text-message support prove non-inferior and more cost-effective than Quitline for this population, this will provide an opportunity for the upscaling of an effective, inexpensive and tailored quit support service. The trial findings will inform cessation treatment policy for priority populations in Australia and globally.

Indexed as

Smoking CessationText MessagingAdultAustraliaCost-Benefit AnalysisCounselingEquivalence Trials as TopicFemaleHotlinesHumansMaleNew South WalesSocial ClassTelephoneEffectivenessrandomized controlled trialsmoking cessationsocial disadvantagetext‐messagingtobacco

Identifiers

PMID39279642
PMCPMC11638494

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.