ArticleBMC primary care2025
Comparison of quit rates among exclusive cigarette smokers at Tobacco Control Center in Qatar: telephone versus face-to-face consultation.
Article in BMC primary care, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDuring the coronavirus 2019 pandemic, smoking cessation services were delivered by telephone instead of routine face-to-face care. The objective of this study was to (1) determine if telephone care increases smoking quit rate compared to face-to-face intervention and (2) investigate factors associated with successful smoking cessation.
methodsA retrospective study design was utilized. Random selection of patients from two groups (face-to-face care and telephone care) that completed 3 follow-up sessions in Tobacco Control Center in Hamad Medical Corporation in Qatar was conducted from April 2020 to September 2021. Quit rates were compared at 4-week, 8-week and 12-week follow-up visits and a multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to obtain factors related to successful quitting at 12-week follow-up.
resultsA total of 138 patients were included in this study (69 patients for each group). At 12-week follow-up, 31.9% of patients of telephone care (n = 22) succeeded in quitting smoking, while only 20.3% (n = 14) remained abstinent in the face-to-face care group. Telephone care compared with standard care increased the odds of success in stopping smoking (AOR = 3.279; 95% Cl: 1.191-9.026). Also, smokers with a previous quit attempt were significantly related to stopping smoking successfully (AOR = 4.724; 95% Cl: 1.131-19.727). Higher consumption of self-reported cigarette smoking was statistically associated with lower success rates in smoking cessation (AOR = 0.919; 95% Cl: 0.874-0.966).
conclusionOur data suggests that providing telephone care seems more effective in smoking cessation treatment compared with routine face-to-face intervention. However, further formal assessment as randomized clinical trial needs to be conducted for more evaluation.
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.