Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39482840›Full record

Trial reportAddiction (Abingdon, England)2025

Cost-utility analysis of provision of e-cigarette starter kits for smoking cessation in emergency departments: An economic evaluation of a randomized controlled trial.

Jinshuo Li, Qi Wu, Steve Parrott, Ian Pope, Lucy V Clark, Allan Clark, Emma Ward, Pippa Belderson, Susan Stirling, Timothy J Coats and 10 more

Abstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report 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 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2026
    Pooled it
  2. Electronic cigarettes for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. 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

20 authors.

Jinshuo LiDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-1496-7450
Qi WuDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-8281-7799
Steve ParrottDepartment of Health Sciences, University of York, York, UK.
Ian PopeNorfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK.
Lucy V ClarkNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Allan ClarkNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Emma WardNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-7579-3215
Pippa BeldersonNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Susan StirlingNorwich Clinical Trials Unit, Norwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.
Timothy J CoatsDepartment of Cardiovascular Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Linda BauldUsher Institute and SPECTRUM Consortium, College of Medicine, University of Edinburgh, UK.
Richard HollandMedical School, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK.
Sarah GentryNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0805-0200
Sanjay AgrawalUniversity Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust, Leicester, UK.
Benjamin M BloomRoyal London Hospital, Barts NHS Trust, London, UK.
Adrian BoyleAddenbrookes Hospital, Cambridge University Hospitals Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.
Alasdair GrayRoyal Infirmary Edinburgh, NHS Lothian, Edinburgh, UK.
M Geraint MorrisHomerton University Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK.
Jonathan Livingstone-BanksNuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences, Oxford, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-3757-5591
Caitlin NotleyNorwich Medical School, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-0876-3304

Funding

NIHR Health Technology Assessment Programme NIHR129438
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsTo assess the cost-effectiveness of the Cessation of Smoking Trial in Emergency Department (COSTED) intervention compared with signposting to local stop smoking service (SSS) from the National Health Service (NHS) and personal social services (PSS) perspective. DESIGN, SETTING AND

participantsThis was a two-group, multi-centre, pragmatic, individually randomized controlled trial set in six Emergency Departments (EDs) in urban and rural areas in the United Kingdom. Adult (≥ 18 years) daily smokers (at least one cigarette or equivalent per day) but not daily e-cigarette users, with carbon monoxide reading ≥ 8 parts per million, attending the ED (n = 972) were included. The intervention consisted of provision of an e-cigarette starter kit plus brief smoking cessation advice and referral to a local SSS. Control was an information card on how to access local SSS. MEASUREMENTS: Intervention costs included costs of training and delivery. Control costs included costs of printing information cards. Costs of smoking cessation and health-care services were estimated based on quantities reported by participants and unit costs extracted from secondary sources. The effects were measured by quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) derived from EQ-5D-5L. Other outcomes were smoking cessation measures. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), which was calculated by dividing the difference in costs by the difference in QALYs between groups.

findingsThe mean intervention costs were £48 [standard error (SE) = £0] per participant and the mean control costs were £0.2 (SE = £0) per participant. Using regression estimates, total costs were £31 [95% confidence interval (CI) = -£341 to £283] higher and 6-month QALYs were 0.004 (95% CI = -0.004 to 0.014) higher in the intervention group than in the control group. The ICER was calculated at £7750 (probability of cost-effective at range £20 000-30 000: 72.2-76.5%).

conclusionsThe UK Cessation of Smoking Trial in Emergency Department (COSTED) intervention (provision of an e-cigarette starter kit plus brief smoking cessation advice) was cost-effective compared with signposting to local stop smoking services under the current recommendations of the maximum acceptable thresholds.

Indexed as

Cost-Benefit AnalysisElectronic Nicotine Delivery SystemsEmergency Service, HospitalSmoking CessationAdultFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedQuality-Adjusted Life YearsState MedicineUnited KingdomBrief interventioncost‐effectivenesse‐cigaretteeconomic evaluationemergency departmentlife‐time modellingMarkov modelrandomized controlled trialsmoking cessation

Identifiers

PMID39482840
PMCPMC11707313

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.