Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 248

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Effect of nicotine chewing gum as an adjunct to general practitioner's advice against smoking.

Open access
Russell, M A, Merriman, R, Stapleton, J, Taylor, W·1983·BMJ

Abstract

This study was designed to see whether the offer and prescription of nicotine chewing gum would enhance the efficacy of general practitioners' advice to stop smoking. A sample of 1938 cigarette smokers who attended the surgeries of 34 general practitioners in six group practices were assigned by week of attendance (in a balanced design) to one of three groups: (a) non-intervention controls, (b) advice plus booklet, and (c) advice plus booklet plus the offer of nicotine gum. Follow up was done after four months and one year. The results show a clear advantage for those offered the nicotine gum (p less than 0.001). After correction for those who refused or failed chemical validation and those who switched from cigarettes to a pipe or cigars, the proportions who were abstinent at four months and still abstinent at one year were 3.9%, 4.1%, and 8.8% in the three groups, respectively. These percentages are based on all cigarette smokers who attended the surgeries including those who did not wish to stop and those in the gum group who did not try the gum (47%). The effect of the offer and prescription of gum was to motivate more smokers to try to stop, to increase the success rate among those who tried, and to reduce the relapse rate of those who stopped. The self selected subgroup of 8% who used more than one box of 105 pieces of gum achieved a success rate of 24%. It would be feasible and effective for general practitioners to include the offer of nicotine gum and brief instructions on its use as part of a minimal intervention routine with all cigarette smokers. A general practitioner who adopts such a routine with similar success could expect to achieve about 35-40 long term ex-smokers a year and so save the lives of about 10 of them. If replicated by all general practitioners throughout the country the yield of ex-smokers would be about one million a year.

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 · 10.1136/bmj.287.6407.1782

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 248

Metadata

Authors
Russell, M. A., Merriman, R., Stapleton, J., & Taylor, W.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
1983-12-10
Volume
287
Issue
6407
Pages
1782-1785
ISSN
  • 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-5833
OpenAlex
W2035639403
Cited by
248
References
0
FWCI
13.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Effect of nicotine chewing gum as an adjunct to general practitioner's advice against smoking. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1136/bmj.287.6407.1782
The paper
Russell, M. A., Merriman, R., Stapleton, J., & Taylor, W. (1983). Effect of nicotine chewing gum as an adjunct to general practitioner's advice against smoking. BMJ. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.287.6407.1782

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.