Cited by 149Smoking Behavior and CessationGlobal Cancer Incidence and ScreeningHealth disparities and outcomes

Assessing the impact of smoking cessation services on reducing health inequalities in England: observational study

Open access
Bauld, Linda, Judge, Ken, Platt, Stephen·2007·Tobacco Control

Abstract

Objective: NHS stop smoking services are expected to play a key part in achieving the infant mortality and life expectancy health inequality targets in England by reducing smoking prevalence in deprived areas. This paper assesses the extent to which services have made a contribution to reducing inequalities in smoking between 2003–4 and 2005–6. Methods: Synthetic estimates of baseline smoking prevalence data were compared with national monitoring data about the numbers of smokers in receipt of services and the proportion who self report quitting at four weeks. The social distribution of service recipients and quitters was compared with estimates of smoking prevalence to assess impact on inequalities. Comparisons were made between officially designated disadvantaged areas (the Spearhead Group) and others. Results: Short-term cessation rates were lower in disadvantaged areas (52.6%) than elsewhere (57.9%) (p<0.001), but the proportion of smokers being treated was higher (16.7% compared with 13.4%) (p<0.001). The net effect was that a higher proportion of smokers in the most disadvantaged areas reported success (8.8%) than in more advantaged areas (7.8%) (p<0.001). Using the evidence-based assumption that three-quarters of short-term quitters will relapse within one year, the absolute and relative rate gaps in smoking prevalence between Spearhead areas and others are estimated to fall by small but statistically significant amounts from 5.2 and 1.215 (CIs: 1.216 to 1.213) to 5.0 and 1.212 (CIs: 1.213 to 1.210) between 2003–4 and 2005–6. Conclusion: NHS stop smoking services have probably made a modest contribution to reducing inequalities in smoking prevalence. To achieve government targets, however, requires both the development of more innovative cessation interventions for the most addicted smokers and action to ensure that other aspects of tobacco control policy make a larger contribution to inequality goals.

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/tc.2007.021626

Cites

16 of 16 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?

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: 3

  1. Department of Health. Statistics on NHS stop smoking services in England, April 2003 to March 2004, Statistical Bulletin 2004/18. London: DH, 2004.
  2. NHS Health and Social Care Information Centre. Statistics on NHS stop smoking services in England, April 2004 to March 2005, Statistical Bulletin 2005/03/ HSCIC. Lifestyles Statistics, Table 19 and Annex B para 4. 31 Statistics on NHS Stop Smoking Services in England. April 2005 to March 2006, Bulletin 2006/14/HSCIC. Leeds: The Information Centre, Lifestyles' Statistics, 2006.
  3. Jarvis M, Wardle J. Social patterning of individual health behaviours: the case of cigarette smoking. In: Marmot M, Wilkinson R, eds. Social determinants of health. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Bauld, L., Judge, K., & Platt, S.
Affiliations
  • University of Bath (GB)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
Corresponding author
Judge, Ken
Venue
Tobacco Control
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2007-11-29
Volume
16
Issue
6
Pages
400-404
ISSN
  • 0964-4563 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3318
OpenAlex
W2121858638
Cited by
149
References
16
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 18
FWCI
6.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Tobacco Control (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Stirling Online Research Repository (University of Stirling) (submittedVersion, public-domain)
Funders
European Commission
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Global Cancer Incidence and Screening
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
smoking cessation services, health disparities, smoking prevalence, underserved areas, relapse, tobacco control, NHS Stop Smoking Services
MeSH terms
Smoking Prevention, England, Humans, Patient Compliance, Preventive Health Services, Smoking, Socioeconomic Factors, State Medicine, Prevalence, 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