ArticleTobacco prevention & cessation2025
An exploration of Michigan certified peer support specialists' perceptions on tobacco use and additional future supports.
Article in Tobacco prevention & cessation, 2025. 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionCertified peer support specialists, recovery coaches and community health workers uniquely connect to individuals who smoke through shared experiences. This study examines peers' perceptions of tobacco cessation supports to enhance policy and intervention opportunities in rural and non-rural communities.
methodsPeers (n=172) responded to a needs assessment available from 30 November 2023 to 1 February 2024. Peers were asked questions about their perceptions of currently available and additional support for tobacco cessation. We report overall ratings of these services, as well as ratings stratified by rurality.
resultsOver half of peers perceived widely available tobacco cessation services (Quitline, counseling, NRT, medications, peer-to-peer support) as somewhat effective. Peers tended to favor financial accessibility, holistic health approaches, flexible approaches focused on harm reduction, and increased tobacco cessation services awareness, as well as peer support as additional services. When stratified by rurality, more rural-residing peers reported current tobacco cessation services as at least somewhat effective, but called for greater access to these services and/or the need for novel approaches specifically for individuals in rural communities. Rural peers emphasized the importance of more holistic support, cessation services awareness, virtual opportunities, peer-led services, and healthcare provider education for stigma prevention than their urban counterparts.
conclusionsMost peers view existing supports as somewhat effective, with peer-to-peer support rated highest. Rural-residing peers favored holistic and virtual supports and urban-residing peers emphasized harm reduction and healthcare coverage, suggesting future cessation efforts within the peer workforce should address rural-specific barriers and leverage community-centered, flexible approaches.
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.