Cited by 82Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesSchizophrenia research and treatment

The prevalence, odds, predictors, and management of tobacco use disorder or nicotine dependence among people with severe mental illness: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Open access
Fornaro, Michele, Carvalho, Andre F., De Prisco, Michele, Mondin, Anna Maria, Billeci, Martina, Selby, Peter, Iasevoli, Felice, Berk, Michael +2 more·2022·Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

Abstract

The prevalence, correlates, and management of tobacco use disorder (TUD) or nicotine dependence (ND) among people with severe mental illness (SMI), namely schizophrenia, bipolar disorder (BD), and major depressive disorder (MDD), remain unclear. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted. Electronic databases were systematically searched from inception to July 12, 2020, for observational studies documenting the prevalence, odds, and correlates of TUD/ND among people with SMI; randomized controlled trials (RCTs) informing the management of TUD/ND in people with SMI were also included. Random-effects meta-analyses were conducted. Sources of heterogeneity were explored. Nineteen observational studies, including 7527 participants with SMI met inclusion criteria. TUD/ND co-occurred in 33.4-65% of people with SMI. Rates were higher among males. While bupropion and varenicline represent promising treatment opportunities for schizophrenia with TUD/ND, non-pharmacological interventions require further research, mainly for people with primary mood disorders. TUD/ND represent prevalent co-occurring conditions among people with SMI. Further well-designed RCTs are warranted to inform their management.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.11.039

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fornaro, M., Carvalho, A. F., De Prisco, M., Mondin, A. M., Billeci, M., Selby, P., Iasevoli, F., Berk, M., Castle, D. J., & de Bartolomeis, A.
Affiliations
  • Federico II University Hospital (IT)
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CA)
  • Barwon Health (AU)
Corresponding author
Carvalho, Andre F.
Venue
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-01
Volume
132
Pages
289-303
ISSN
0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3215405232
Cited by
82
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 5
FWCI
1.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Own your potential (DEAKIN) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
Keywords
tobacco use disorder, nicotine dependence, severe mental illness, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, prevalence, predictive factors, bupropion, varenicline, tobacco dependence treatment, non-pharmacological treatment, comorbidities
MeSH terms
Varenicline, Mental Disorders, Humans, Male, Tobacco Use Disorder, Prevalence, 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