Randomized Controlled Trial of a Computer-Based, Tailored Intervention to Increase Smoking Cessation Counseling by Primary Care Physicians
Open accessAbstract
Objective The primary care visit represents an important venue for intervening with a large population of smokers. However, physician adherence to the Smoking Cessation Clinical Guideline (5As) remains low. We evaluated the effectiveness of a computer-tailored intervention designed to increase smoking cessation counseling by primary care physicians.Methods Physicians and their patients were randomized to either intervention or control conditions. In addition to brief smoking cessation training, intervention physicians and patients received a one-page report that characterized the patients' smoking habit and history and offered tailored recommendations. Physician performance of the 5As was assessed via patient exit interviews. Quit rates and smoking behaviors were assessed 6 months postintervention via patient phone interviews. Intervention effects were tested in a sample of 70 physicians and 518 of their patients. Results were analyzed via generalized and mixed linear modeling controlling for clustering.Measurements and main results Intervention physicians exceeded controls on "Assess" (OR 5.06; 95% CI 3.22, 7.95), "Advise" (OR 2.79; 95% CI 1.70, 4.59), "Assist-set goals" (OR 4.31; 95% CI 2.59, 7.16), "Assist-provide written materials" (OR 5.14; 95% CI 2.60, 10.14), "Assist-provide referral" (OR 6.48; 95% CI 3.11, 13.49), "Assist-discuss medication" (OR 4.72;95% CI 2.90, 7.68), and "Arrange" (OR 8.14; 95% CI 3.98, 16.68), all p values being < 0.0001. Intervention patients were 1.77 (CI 0.94, 3.34,p = 0.078) times more likely than controls to be abstinent (12 versus 8%), a difference that approached, but did not reach statistical significance, and surpassed controls on number of days quit (18.4 versus 12.2, p < .05) but not on number of quit attempts.Conclusions The use of a brief computer-tailored report improved physicians' implementation of the 5As and had a modest effect on patients' smoking behaviors 6 months postintervention.
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
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Only a small minority of providers continue on to agree on goals, assist with treatment, and arrange follow-up.
“In contrast, only a small minority continue on to agree on goals, assist with treatment, and arrange follow-up,22,47,48”
From Better Population Health Through Behavior Change in Adults: A Call to Action (2013) · cites this paper as [48]
The latter, less frequently performed 3 A's have the greatest impact on healthful behavior change.
“and it is these latter, less frequently performed 3 A’s that have the greatest impact on healthful behavior change.22,47–51”
From Better Population Health Through Behavior Change in Adults: A Call to Action (2013) · cites this paper as [48]
For both obesity and smoking, a majority of providers now perform the first 2 A's: Assess the risk behavior and advise behavior change.
“However, progress has been made, and for both obesity and smoking, a majority of providers now perform the first 2 A’s: Assess the risk behavior and advise behavior change.46–48”
From Better Population Health Through Behavior Change in Adults: A Call to Action (2013) · cites this paper as [48]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 48 · Cited by 95
- Authors
- Unrod, M., Smith, M., Spring, B., DePue, J., Redd, W., & Winkel, G.
- Affiliations
- Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
- Northwestern University (US)
- Brown University (US)
- City University of New York (US)
- Corresponding author
- Unrod, Marina
- Venue
- Journal of General Internal Medicine
- Published
- 2007-02-06
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 478-484
- ISSN
- 0884-8734 (ISSN-L)
- 1525-1497
- PMC
- PMC1829425
- OpenAlex
- W1980513389
- Cited by
- 95
- References
- 48
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 4.92
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Journal of General Internal Medicine (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (R01HS10547-0182)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
- Keywords
- smoking cessation counseling, computer-tailored intervention, primary care physicians, physician adherence, smoking cessation training, smoking cessation referral, smoking cessation medication
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Counseling, Decision Making, Computer-Assisted, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Patient Education as Topic, Physician's Role, Physicians, Family, Smoking Cessation
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