Trial reportThorax2026
Randomised trial of delivering co-located, personalised stop-smoking support within lung cancer screening: the YESS study.
Trial report in Thorax, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03750110 (The Effect of Adding a Personalised Smoking Cessation Intervention to a Lung Cancer Screening Programme), which is not on this 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.
The Effect of Adding a Personalised Smoking Cessation Intervention to a Lung Cancer Screening Programme
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
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionLung cancer screening (LCS) with low-dose CT offers a teachable moment for smoking cessation (SC), but the optimal way to implement SC within LCS is unclear. The Yorkshire Enhanced Stop Smoking (YESS) study assessed the efficacy of a personalised stop-smoking intervention delivered alongside LCS.
methodsOpt-out, co-located SC support, comprising nicotine replacement therapy/e-cigarettes/pharmacotherapy and behavioural support, was offered to all individuals who currently smoked attending for LCS. Four weeks later, participants were offered recruitment to a randomised controlled trial of continued standard best practice (SBP) versus a personalised SC support package, including a booklet containing CT images of participants' own heart and lungs, annotated where appropriate to highlight emphysema or coronary artery calcification and scripted communication delivered by a smoking cessation practitioner.
results1003 people were recruited; 52.5% were allocated to the intervention group. Validated 7-day point prevalent (PP) abstinence rates were 33.6% and 30.0% in the intervention versus SBP groups, respectively (OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.54) at 3 months and 29.2% versus 28.6% (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.36) at 12 months post-screening. Subgroup analyses indicated a significant increase in 7-day PP abstinence at 3 months with the intervention in women (33.9% intervention, 23.1% SBP, OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.53) but not in men (33.3% intervention, 37.8% SBP, OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.19).
conclusionAround one-third of study participants were abstinent from smoking at 3 months post-screening irrespective of study arm, but adding the personalised intervention did not increase quit rates. Further research is needed exploring possible sex differences in efficacy of personalised SC support. The high overall quit rate reinforces the value of SC support delivered alongside LCS. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCRN 63825779 and NCT03750110.
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.