ArticleTobacco use insights2025
Geographic Representativeness of a Digital Tobacco Cessation Intervention: An Exploration of Changes in Rural Reach From 2013-2020.
Article in Tobacco use insights, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study examines the geographic representativeness of people who smoke, among newly registered users of a free digital tobacco cessation program ('EX'). Methods: User-provided ZIP codes from EX® Program registrants were mapped to Rural Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC). Reach Ratios (ReRas) and 95% confidence intervals were used to determine the extent to which geographic representation in EX was proportionate to their representation in the national population of individuals who smoke, as obtained from the United States National Survey of Drug Use and Health (2018-2020). Under- and overrepresentation was demonstrated by ReRas <1 or >1, respectively. Joinpoint regression analyses were used to determine significant changes in trend for ReRas from 2013 to 2020. Results: Individuals who reported smoking residing in nonmetro rural areas were significantly overrepresented in 2018 [ReRa = 1.18 (95% CI: 1.15, 1.23)], 2019 [ReRa = 1.10 (95% CI: 1.07, 1.13)], and 2020 [ReRa = 1.10 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.13)]. Individuals who reported smoking from small metro areas were also overrepresented from 2018 to 2020 [ReRas = 1.09 (95% CI: 1.06, 1.11); 1.06 (95% CI: 1.04, 1.08), and 1.05 (95% CI: 1.03, 1.08), respectively] and individuals who reported smoking from large metro areas were underrepresented during the same time frame [ReRas = 0.87 (95% CI: 0.85, 0.89); 0.92 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.94), and 0.93 (95% CI: 0.91, 0.94), respectively]. ReRas for large metro areas decreased from 2013 to 2018 (annual percentage change, APC = -3.26; 95% CI: -6.69, -1.91). ReRas for non-metro areas increased from 2013 to 2017 (APC = 7.35; 95% CI: 4.10, 17.63). Conclusions: Results suggest that individuals that smoke residing in nonmetro rural areas and small metro areas are proportionally reached by a digital tobacco cessation program. However, there continues to be an underrepresentation of individuals who smoke from large metro areas, which warrants further study.
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.