| Title |
Five population-based interventions for smoking cessation: a MOST trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Translational Behavioral Medicine, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13142-014-0278-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
D Fraser, K Kobinsky, S S Smith, J Kramer, W E Theobald, T B Baker |
| Abstract |
Little is known about the relative, additive, and interactive effects of different population-based treatments for smoking cessation. The goal of this study was to evaluate the main and interactive effects of five different smoking interventions. Using the multiphase optimization strategy (MOST), 1,034 smokers who entered a Web site for smokers (smokefree.gov) were randomly assigned to the "on" and "off" conditions of five smoking cessation interventions: the National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Web site (www.smokefree.gov vs a "lite" Web site), telephone quitline counseling (vs none), a smoking cessation brochure (vs a lite brochure), motivational e-mail messages (vs none), and mini-lozenge nicotine replacement therapy (NRT vs none). Analyses showed that the NCI Web site and NRT both increased abstinence; however, the former increased abstinence significantly only when it was not used with the e-mail messaging intervention (messaging decreased Web site use). The other interventions showed little evidence of effectiveness. There was evidence that mailed nicotine mini-lozenges and the NCI Web site (www.smokefree.gov) provide benefit as population-based smoking interventions. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 57 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Denmark | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 56 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 16% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 11% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 10 | 18% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 10 | 18% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 9 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 12% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 5 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 3 | 5% |
| Unknown | 19 | 33% |
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 20 August 2014.
All research outputs
#18,376,056
of 22,760,687 outputs
Outputs from Translational Behavioral Medicine
#855
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#167,916
of 235,512 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Translational Behavioral Medicine
#19
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,760,687 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 989 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.8. This one is in the 7th percentile – i.e., 7% 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 235,512 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.