Cited by 113Smoking Behavior and CessationAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchCardiac Health and Mental Health

Smoking reduction, smoking cessation, and incidence of fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction in Denmark 1976–1998: a pooled cohort study

Open access
Godtfredsen, N S, Osler, M, Vestbo, J, Andersen, I, Prescott, E·2003·Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the effects of smoking reduction and smoking cessation on incidence of myocardial infarction after adjustment for established cardiovascular risk factors. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study with record linkage to mortality and hospital registers. The association of individual change in smoking with myocardial infarction was examined in Cox proportional hazard analyses with continuous heavy smokers (> or =5 cigarettes/day) as reference. SETTING: Pooled data from three population studies conducted in Copenhagen, Denmark. PARTICIPANTS: 10 956 men and 8467 women with complete information on smoking habits at two examinations five to ten years apart were followed up from the second examination for a first hospital admission or death from myocardial infarction. Mean duration of follow up was 13.8 years. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 643 participants who were heavy smokers at baseline reduced their daily tobacco consumption by at least 50% without quitting between first and second examination, and 1379 participants stopped smoking. During follow up 1658 men and 521 women experienced a fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction. After adjustment for cardiovascular risk factors, people who stopped smoking had a decreased risk of myocardial infarction, hazard ratio 0.71 (95% confidence intervals 0.59 to 0.85). Smoking reduction was not associated with reduced risk of myocardial infarction, hazard ratio 1.15 (95% confidence intervals 0.94 to 1.40). These associations remained unchanged after controlling for baseline illness in different ways. CONCLUSIONS: Smoking cessation in healthy people reduces the risk of a subsequent myocardial infarction, whereas this study provides no evidence of benefit from reduction in the amount smoked.

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/jech.57.6.412

Cites

31 of 31 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?

  • Cigarette reductions of 50% or greater do not lead to significantly reduced risk for fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction compared to smokers who did not reduce (HR 1.2, 95% CI 0.9 to 1.4).

    “Epidemiological, longitudinal studies have shown that cigarette reductions of 50% or greater does not lead to a significantly reduced risk for fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction compared to smokers who did not reduce their cigarette smoking (Hazard Ratio [HR] 1.2; 95% CI 0.9, 1.4) (128)”

    From Tobacco addiction (2008) · cites this paper as [128]

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

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Appleyard M, Hansen AT, Schnohr P, et al. The Copenhagen City Heart Study. A book of tables with data from the first examination (1976-78) and a 5-year follow-up (1981-83). Scand J Soc Med 1989;170:1-160.
  2. Blanco-Cedres L, Daviglus ML, Garside DB, et al. Relation of cigarette smoking to 25-year mortality in middle-aged men with low baseline serum cholesterol. Am J Epidemiol 2002;155:354-60.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Godtfredsen, N. S., Osler, M., Vestbo, J., Andersen, I., & Prescott, E.
Affiliations
  • Copenhagen University Hospital (DK)
  • University of Copenhagen (DK)
  • Hvidovre Hospital (DK)
Corresponding author
Godtfredsen, N S
Venue
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2003-06
Volume
57
Issue
6
Pages
412-416
ISSN
  • 0141-7681 (ISSN-L)
  • 0143-005X
  • 1470-2738
OpenAlex
W2010564219
Cited by
112
References
31
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 8
FWCI
4.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Acute Myocardial Infarction Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
Keywords
smoking cessation, smoking reduction, myocardial infarction, cardiovascular risk factors, heavy smokers, tobacco use, Denmark
MeSH terms
Cause of Death, Denmark, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Myocardial Infarction, Prospective Studies, Risk Factors, Smoking, Cohort Studies, Incidence, Proportional Hazards Models, 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