Cited by 56Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesPrenatal Substance Exposure Effects

Association between use of nicotine replacement therapy for harm reduction and smoking cessation: a prospective study of English smokers

Open access
Beard, Emma, McNeill, Ann, Aveyard, Paul, Fidler, Jenny, Michie, Susan, West, Robert·2013·Tobacco Control

Abstract

AIMS: It is important to know how far smokers' attempts at using nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) for smoking 'harm reduction' (reducing harm from continued smoking) promote or undermine cessation. To contribute to that goal, this study aimed to assess whether smokers' reports of smoking reduction (SR) and the use of NRT for SR and temporary abstinence (TA) predicted subsequent attempts to quit smoking and smoking status in a population sample. It also examined whether use of NRT for SR or TA was associated with reduced cigarette consumption compared with SR without NRT and non-use of NRT for TA. METHOD: Data were collected from 15 539 smokers involved in the Smoking Toolkit Study, a series of monthly household surveys of adults aged 16+; of whom 23% (n=3149) completed a 6-month follow-up questionnaire. At baseline, participants were asked whether they were currently using NRT for SR or TA. They were also asked for demographic information and daily cigarette consumption. At 6-month follow-up, data on attempts to quit smoking and smoking status were collected. RESULTS: NRT use for SR and TA prospectively predicted attempts to quit smoking (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.01 and OR 1.94, 95% CI 1.56 to 2.38 for SR and TA respectively) and abstinence (OR 1.51, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.16 and OR 2.09, 95% CI 1.51 to 3.34 for SR and TA respectively) at 6-months follow-up. Use of NRT for SR or TA was associated with a small reduction in cigarette consumption (two cigarettes per day) compared with SR without NRT or non-use of NRT for TA. CONCLUSIONS: The use of NRT for SR or TA appears to be positively associated with subsequent attempts to quit smoking and abstinence among smokers in England, despite very little apparent effect on daily cigarette consumption. With replication, these findings support the potential benefit of using NRT for harm reduction but primarily as a means of promoting cessation.

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/tobaccocontrol-2011-050007

Cites

26 of 26 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: 2

  1. Research paper copyright. on November 25, 2023 by guest. Protected by http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/ Tob Control: first published as 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050007 on 1 December 2011. Downloaded from Research paper copyright. on November 25, 2023 by guest. Protected by http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/ Tob Control: first published as 10.1136/tobaccocontrol-2011-050007 on 1 December 2011. Downloaded from
  2. West R, Beard E, Michie S, et al. A taxonomy of harm reduction for use in tobacco control. Addiction. In press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Beard, E., McNeill, A., Aveyard, P., Fidler, J., Michie, S., & West, R.
Affiliations
  • Cancer Research UK (GB)
  • University of Birmingham (GB)
  • University College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Beard, Emma
Venue
Tobacco Control
Publisher
BMJ
Published
2011-12-01
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
118-122
ISSN
  • 0964-4563 (ISSN-L)
  • 1468-3318
OpenAlex
W2136716332
Cited by
56
References
26
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
FWCI
3.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Tobacco Control (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Pfizer
  • Cancer Research UK (14135)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research
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
nicotine replacement therapy, harm reduction, smoking cessation, smoking reduction, smoking cessation attempts, smoking abstinence, cigarette consumption, smokers
MeSH terms
Smoking Prevention, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, England, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Health Promotion, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Smoking, Smoking Cessation, Harm Reduction, Young Adult, Tobacco Use Cessation Devices

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