The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Smoking Cessation in Hospitalized Patients: Results of a Randomized Trial
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few research studies have evaluated the effectiveness of smoking interventions in hospitalized patients. This randomized controlled trial compared the efficacy of 2 smoking cessation programs in patients hospitalized in 4 community hospitals in a large health maintenance organization within the San Francisco Bay Area in California. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to usual care (n = 990), nurse-mediated, behaviorally oriented inpatient counseling focused on relapse prevention with 1 postdischarge telephone contact (minimal intervention, n = 473), or the same inpatient counseling with 4 postdischarge telephone contacts (intensive intervention, n = 561). The main outcome measure, smoking cessation rate, was corroborated by plasma cotinine determination or family confirmation, 1 year after enrollment. RESULTS: At 1 year smoking cessation rates were 27%, 22%, and 20% for intensive intervention, minimal intervention, and usual care groups, respectively (P = .009 for intensive vs usual care). Subgroup analyses by diagnosis revealed that the odds of cessation among patients with cardiovascular disease or other internal medical conditions were greater among those receiving the intensive intervention than among their counterparts receiving usual care (odds ratios, 1.6 and 2.0, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: A multicomponent smoking cessation program consisting of physician advice; in-hospital, nurse-mediated counseling; and multiple postdischarge telephone contacts was effective in increasing smoking cessation rates among hospitalized smokers. Hospital-wide smoking cessation programs could substantially increase the effectiveness of hospital smoking bans.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Smoking Cessation after Acute Myocardial Infarction: Effects of a Nurse-Managed Intervention
Taylor, C. B., Houston-Miller, N., Killen, J. D., & DeBusk, R. F. (1990) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-113-2-118 · Cited by 394
Cited by
Physician advice for smoking cessation
Stead, L. F., Buitrago, D., Preciado, N., Sanchez, G., Hartmann-Boyce, J., & Lancaster, T. (2013) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd000165.pub4 · Cited by 1,955
Nursing interventions for smoking cessation
Rice, V. H., & Stead, L. F. (2008) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd001188.pub3 · Cited by 649
Ockene, I. S., & Miller, N. H. (1997) · Circulation · doi:10.1161/01.cir.96.9.3243 · Cited by 541
Self-citationHopkins, D. P., Briss, P. A., Ricard, C. J., Husten, C. G., Carande-Kulis, V. G., Fielding, J. E., Alao, M. O., McKenna, J. W., Sharp, D. J., Harris, J. R., et al. (2001) · American Journal of Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0749-3797(00)00297-x · Cited by 453
Mistiaen, P., & Poot, E. (2006) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004510.pub3 · Cited by 299
Metadata
- Authors
- Miller, N. H.
- Venue
- Archives of Internal Medicine
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 1997-02-24
- Volume
- 157
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 409
- ISSN
- 0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2038269492
- Cited by
- 199
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 6.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Smoking Cessation in Hospitalized Patients: Results of a Randomized Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/archinte.1997.00440250059007
- The paper
- Miller, N. H. (1997). Smoking Cessation in Hospitalized Patients: Results of a Randomized Trial. Archives of Internal Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.1997.00440250059007
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.