Cited by 103Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesHealth Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention

Performance of English stop smoking services in first 10 years: analysis of service monitoring data

Open access
West, R., May, S., West, M., Croghan, E., McEwen, A.·2013·BMJ

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To analyse the performance of the English Stop Smoking Services from 2001/02 to 2010/11. DESIGN: Analysis of national service monitoring data. SETTING: England. PARTICIPANTS: Smokers recorded as having been treated by English stop smoking services between April 2001 and March 2011. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Annual figures for the number of quit dates set (throughput), the percentage of these that led to biochemically verified abstinence after four weeks (four week quit rate), and the "impact" in terms of the number of four week quitters beyond those who it is estimated would have stopped with only a prescription for smoking cessation treatment; characteristics of smokers being treated, medication used, and mode of delivery (for example, one to one, group based); variability across local services in throughput, four week quit rates, and impact for 2010/11. RESULTS: Throughput rose from 227,335 in 2001/02 to 787,527 (8% of all smokers) in 2010/11. The percentage of four week quitters declined slightly from 35% to 34%. Impact rose from 22,933 four week quitters created in 2001/02 to 72,411 in 2010/11 (corresponding to an estimated 21,723 12 month quitters). The services were successful in reaching disadvantaged smokers; 54% (n = 425,684) were in receipt of free prescriptions in 2010/11. Substantial variation existed across local services in throughput, success rates, and impact. CONCLUSIONS: The English stop smoking services have had an increasing impact in helping smokers to stop in their first 10 years of operation and have successfully reached disadvantaged groups. However, performance across local services has varied considerably.

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.f4921

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Smokers attempting to stop with NRT and minimal behavioural support have previously been estimated to have quit rates of 25% (for CO-validated quits) and 35% (for self-reported quits) at 4 weeks.

    “Smokers attempting to stop with NRT and minimal behavioural support have previously been estimated to have quit rates of 25% (for CO-validated quits) and 35% (for self-reported quits) at 4 weeks”
  • Previous research with 'self-quitters' not participating in a smoking treatment programme has estimated abstinence rates at 25% at 4 weeks, which is considerably lower than the overall 4-week quit rate (41%) and the lowest 95% CI boundary (36%).

    “Previous research with 'self-quitters' not participating in a smoking treatment programme has estimated abstinence rates at 25% at 4 weeks, 42 which is considerably lower than the overall 4-week quit rate (41%) and the lowest 95% CI boundary (36%).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
West, R., May, S., West, M., Croghan, E., & McEwen, A.
Affiliations
Cancer Research UK (GB)
Corresponding author
West, R.
Venue
BMJ
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2013-08-19
Volume
347
Issue
aug19 2
Pages
f4921-f4921
ISSN
1756-1833 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1964434486
Cited by
103
References
17
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 1
FWCI
8.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • BMJ (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Cancer Research UK (14135)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (49945)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Health Promotion and Cardiovascular Prevention
Keywords
smoking cessation services, smoking cessation, service performance, nicotine replacement therapy, England
MeSH terms
Smoking Prevention, England, Female, Humans, Male, Patient Compliance, Preventive Health Services, Smoking, Socioeconomic Factors, State Medicine, Smoking Cessation, Treatment Outcome

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