ArticleLancet regional health. Americas2026
E-cigarettes versus combination nicotine replacement therapy following a recent failed quit attempt: a pragmatic randomized trial through state tobacco quitlines.
Article in Lancet regional health. Americas, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Patterns of Use of e-Cigarettes and Their Respiratory Effects: A Critical Umbrella Review.Tobacco use insights · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: E-cigarettes have emerged as a potentially more effective and satisfying alternative to nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smokers who struggle to quit. Although quitlines are effective platforms for tobacco cessation, they have not incorporated e-cigarettes due to regulatory concerns and limited clinical evidence. We evaluated whether quitline-delivered counseling combined with e-cigarettes was more effective than counseling with NRT among adults who recently failed to quit using standard quitline services. Methods: We conducted a pragmatic, open-label, parallel-group randomised controlled trial with two U.S. state quitlines between October 2020 and January 2023. Adults [N = 350; 212 (61%) female & 248 (72%) white] who were still smoking after a recent quitline enrollment were randomised (1:1) to receive 8 weeks of either JUUL e-cigarettes or a combination of nicotine patch and lozenge, along with three counseling calls. The primary outcome was biochemically verified 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence (7-day PPA) at 8 weeks. Analyses used an intent-to-treat approach; secondary outcomes included 12-week abstinence, prolonged abstinence, changes in smoking behavior, dependence, and adverse effects. Findings: At 8 weeks, 7-day PPA did not differ significantly between e-cigarette and NRT groups [25 (14.3%) of 175 and 17 (9.7%) of 175, respectively; OR 1.56; 95% CI 0.80-3.04; p = 0.19]. Both groups showed similar reductions in cigarette use and dependence. Adherence to counseling and assigned products was high. Adverse events were generally mild; cough and breathing difficulties were more frequently reported in the e-cigarette group and NRT participants reported more dizziness, sleeplessness, and allergies. Interpretation: Among quitline users with a recent failed quit attempt, e-cigarettes combined with quitline counseling were not more effective than combination NRT in increasing smoking abstinence after 8 weeks' follow-up. Funding: U.S. National Institute on Drug Abuse.
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.