| Title |
Traditional and Innovative Promotional Strategies of Tobacco Cessation Services: A Review of the Literature
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Community Health, February 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10900-014-9825-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Behnoosh Momin, Antonio Neri, Kristen McCausland, Jennifer Duke, Heather Hansen, Jennifer Kahende, Lei Zhang, Sherri L. Stewart |
| Abstract |
An estimated 43.5 million American adults currently smoke cigarettes. Well-designed tobacco education campaigns with adequate reach increase cessation and reduce tobacco use. Smokers report great interest in quitting but few use effective treatments including quitlines (QLs). This review examined traditional (TV, radio, print ads) versus innovative tobacco cessation (internet, social media) promotions for QL services. Between November 2011 and January 2012, searches were conducted on EBSCO, PubMed, Wilson, OCLC, CQ Press, Google Scholar, Gale, LexisNexis, and JSTOR. Existing literature shows that the amount of radio and print advertising, and promotion of free cessation medications increases QL call volume. Television advertising volume seems to be the best predictor of QL service awareness. Much of the literature on Internet advertising compares the characteristics of participants recruited for studies through various channels. The majority of the papers indicated that Internet-recruited participants were younger; this was the only demographic characteristic with high agreement across studies. Traditional media was only studied within mass media campaigns with TV ads having a consistent impact on increasing calls to QLs, therefore, it is hard to distinguish the impact of traditional media as an independent QL promotion intervention. With innovative media, while many QL services have a presence on social media sites, there is no literature on evaluating the effectiveness of these channels for quitline promotion. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 74 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 14 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 15% |
| Researcher | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 8 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 12 | 16% |
| Unknown | 16 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 20% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 6 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 6 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 22% |
| Unknown | 18 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 February 2014.
All research outputs
#18,369,403
of 22,751,628 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Community Health
#993
of 1,212 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,637
of 313,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Community Health
#14
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,751,628 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,212 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.