Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39916446›Full record

ArticleAddiction (Abingdon, England)2025

The use of financial incentives for smoking cessation in pregnant women: A parallel-group randomised controlled trial protocol.

Megan L Hammersley, Gustaaf A Dekker, Lyle C Gurrin, Elizabeth A Hoon, Stefanie Schurer, John W Lynch, Marnie Aldred, Julia Dalton, Cherise J Fletcher, Lisa G Smithers

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 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

10 authors.

Megan L HammersleySchool of Social Sciences, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4326-480X
Gustaaf A DekkerNorthern Adelaide Local Health Network, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Lyle C GurrinMelbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Elizabeth A HoonAdelaide Medical School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Stefanie SchurerSchool of Economics, University of Sydney, Camperdown, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
John W LynchSchool of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Marnie AldredNorthern Adelaide Local Health Network, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Julia DaltonNorthern Adelaide Local Health Network, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Cherise J FletcherSchool of Public Health, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Lisa G SmithersSchool of Social Sciences, Faculty of the Arts, Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia.

Funding

Medical Research Future Fund 1200729
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsSmoking cessation during pregnancy results in short- and long-term health benefits for the mother and infant. Despite public health policies and initiatives to reduce smoking, smoking in pregnancy remains unacceptably high in Australia, particularly among populations of high disadvantage. Internationally, the use of financial incentives has shown some promise in assisting pregnant women to quit smoking, but more research is needed in different contexts. This study aims to determine the efficacy, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of the use of financial incentives in Australia.

design2-arm parallel-group randomised controlled trial.

settingAustralian antenatal care setting.

participantsPregnant women who smoke.

interventionWomen randomised to the intervention group will receive financial incentives of increasing value at three time points throughout their pregnancy (4 and 12 weeks from the first antenatal visit and 37 weeks gestation) upon confirmation of smoking abstinence. MEASUREMENTS: The primary comparison outcome is a composite binary measure of abstinence at three time points during pregnancy (4, 12 and 37 weeks). Smoking abstinence will be determined by a carbon monoxide breath analysis reading of ≤3 ppm. The primary statistical analysis is estimation of the absolute difference in the prevalence of abstinence at all three time points based on the intention-to-treat groups. A cost-effectiveness analysis will be undertaken to quantify the social returns of the intervention. A qualitative process evaluation will also be conducted to determine fidelity, contextual factors and the acceptability of the intervention to pregnant women and healthcare workers. COMMENTS: This study will be the first Australian trial of financial incentives in reducing smoking in pregnancy. The findings will provide evidence on the acceptability, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of financial incentives to reduce smoking in pregnancy in Australia.

Indexed as

MotivationPregnant PeoplePrenatal CareSmoking CessationAdultAustraliaCost-Effectiveness AnalysisFemaleHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicPregnancyRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRewardAbstinenceacceptabilityantenatalcost‐effectivenessinterventiontobacco

Identifiers

PMID39916446
PMCPMC12046475

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.