Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 236

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Smoking cessation in methadone maintenance

Shoptaw, Steve, Rotheram‐Fuller, Erin, Yang, Xiaowei, Frosch, Dominick, Nahom, Debbie, Jarvik, Murray E., Rawson, Richard A., Ling, Walter·2002·Addiction

Abstract

Aims To evaluate relapse prevention (relapse prevention) and contingency management (contingency management) for optimizing smoking cessation outcomes using nicotine replacement therapy for methadone‐maintained tobacco smokers. Design Experimental, 2 (relapse prevention)×2 (contingency management) repeated measures design using a platform of nicotine replacement therapy featuring a 2‐week baseline period, followed by randomization to 12weeks of treatment, and 6‐ and 12‐month follow‐up visits. Setting Three narcotic treatment centers in Los Angeles. Participants One hundred and seventy‐five participants who met all inclusion and no exclusion criteria. Intervention Participants received 12weeks of nicotine replacement therapy and assignment to one of four conditions: patch‐only, relapse prevention + patch, contingency management + patch and relapse prevention + contingency management + patch. Measurements Thrice weekly samples of breath (analyzed for carbon monoxide) and urine (analyzed for metabolites of opiates and cocaine) and weekly self‐reported numbers of cigarettes smoked. Findings Participants (73.1%) completed 12weeks of treatment. During treatment, those assigned to receive contingency management showed statistically higher rates of smoking abstinence than those not assigned to receive contingencies (F3,4680=6.3, P=0.0003), with no similar effect observed for relapse prevention. At follow‐up evaluations, there were no significant differences between conditions. Participants provided more opiate and cocaine‐free urines during weeks when they met criteria for smoking abstinence than during weeks when they did not meet these criteria (F1,2054=14.38, P=0.0002; F1,2419=16.52, P<0.0001). Conclusions Contingency management optimized outcomes using nicotine replacement therapy for reducing cigarette smoking during treatment for opiate dependence, although long‐term effects are not generally maintained. Findings document strong associations between reductions in cigarette smoking and reductions in illicit substance use during treatment.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00221.x

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 236

Metadata

Authors
Shoptaw, S., Rotheram‐Fuller, E., Yang, X., Frosch, D., Nahom, D., Jarvik, M. E., Rawson, R. A., & Ling, W.
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-09-30
Volume
97
Issue
10
Pages
1317-1328
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
OpenAlex
W2119586196
Cited by
236
References
7
FWCI
5.14
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 methadone maintenance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00221.x
The paper
Shoptaw, S., Rotheram‐Fuller, E., Yang, X., Frosch, D., Nahom, D., Jarvik, M. E., Rawson, R. A., & Ling, W. (2002). Smoking cessation in methadone maintenance. Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00221.x

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.