Cited by 104Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects

Smoking withdrawal dynamics: III. Correlates of withdrawal heterogeneity

Piasecki, Thomas M., Jorenby, Douglas E., Smith, Stevens S., Fiore, Michael C., Baker, Timothy B.·2003·Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology

Abstract

Five parameters of postcessation smoking withdrawal variability derived from clinical data (T. M. Piasecki, D. E. Jorenby, S. S. Smith, M. C. Fiore, & T. B. Baker, 2003a, 2003b) were predicted from baseline measures and pharmacotherapy assignment. Smokers who were more dependent, older, and high in negative affect reported more severe withdrawal. Women, heavier smokers, and those with a history of depression reported more variable symptoms. Smokers treated with nicotine patch, bupropion, or both reported less severe withdrawal than did those given placebo, but medication did not affect the slope of symptoms over time, day-to-day variability of symptoms, or the size of acute changes in symptoms associated with lapses to smoking. Prior research has shown that these symptom facets predict later relapse: thus, current pharmacotherapies may aid cessation by diminishing withdrawal severity, but they do not affect all clinically important aspects of withdrawal.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/1064-1297.11.4.276

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Increased severity of nicotine withdrawal predicts increased relapse rates.

    “Nicotine withdrawal symptoms are highly variable between patients and can be quite severe, with increased severity of withdrawal being predictive of increased rates of relapse [25, 27, 128–130].”

    From Mechanistic insights into nicotine withdrawal (2011) · cites this paper as [129]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Piasecki, T. M., Jorenby, D. E., Smith, S. S., Fiore, M. C., & Baker, T. B.
Affiliations
  • University of Missouri (US)
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Venue
Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
Published
2003
Volume
11
Issue
4
Pages
276-285
ISSN
  • 1064-1297 (ISSN-L)
  • 1936-2293
OpenAlex
W1999157638
Cited by
104
References
40
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01da007580-04)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA07580-03)
  • National Cancer Institute (CA84724-02, P50CA084724)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Substance Exposure Effects
Keywords
nicotine withdrawal, nicotine dependence, nicotine patch, bupropion, nicotine replacement therapy, smoking cessation, smoking relapse, negative affect, history of depression, smoking lapse
MeSH terms
Administration, Cutaneous, Double-Blind Method, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Nicotine, Predictive Value of Tests, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Recurrence, Severity of Illness Index, Smoking, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, Time Factors, Tobacco Use Disorder, Chi-Square Distribution, Smoking Cessation, Bupropion, Treatment Outcome, Nicotinic Agonists, Dopamine Uptake Inhibitors

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