CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects

Recycling with nicotine patches in smoking cessation

TØNNESEN, PHILIP, NØRREGAARD, JESPER, SÄWE, URBAIN, SIMONSEN, KÅRE·1993·Addiction
DOI 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02060.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The aim was to evaluate if recycling of failures from a smoking cessation study may be of value. The study comprised 126 smokers (50%) of 252 failures, from a double-blind smoking cessation trial with nicotine patch, who accepted recycling after 1 year. Subjects were allocated nicotine patches delivering 15, 20 or 25 mg of nicotine (over 16 hours) according to their base-line saliva cotinine concentrations in an open trial. The treatment period was 12 weeks followed by tapering over 6 weeks. The percentage of quitters after 3, 12, 26, and 52 weeks was 44, 20, 7 and 6%, respectively. After 26 weeks, all subjects had relapsed in the group previously treated with active nicotine patch compared with 12% abstainers in the previous placebo subjects. The sustained abstinence rate without slips after one year was 2%. Recycling does not seem to be of long-term clinical relevance in our set-up for subjects initially treated with nicotine, but of some value in subjects quitting without nicotine therapy initially.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02060.x

Cites

22 of 22 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?

  • Repeated use of the nicotine patch shortly after prior cessation failure with the patch did not lead to significant cessation rates (0% to 1.6% sustained abstinence at 26 weeks).

    “To date, repeated use of the nicotine patch shortly after prior cessation failure with the patch did not lead to significant cessation rates (0% to 1.6% sustained abstinence at 26 weeks, (120, 121).”

    From Tobacco addiction (2008) · cites this paper as [121]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
TØNNESEN, P., NØRREGAARD, J., SÄWE, U., & SIMONSEN, K.
Affiliations
Bispebjerg Hospital (DK)
Corresponding author
TØNNESEN, PHILIP
ORCID
TØNNESEN, PHILIP
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1993-04
Volume
88
Issue
4
Pages
533-539
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
DOI
10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02060.x
OpenAlex
W1997119641
Cited by
48
References
22
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 4681 d)
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
smoking cessation, nicotine patch, relapse, sustained abstinence, nicotine dose, saliva cotinine, nicotine replacement therapy, tapering
MeSH terms
Administration, Cutaneous, Adult, Aged, Cotinine, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Nicotine, Recurrence, Saliva, Substance Withdrawal Syndrome, 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