The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation (COMMIT): I. cohort results from a four-year community intervention.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES. The primary hypothesis of COMMIT (Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation) was that a community-level, multi-channel, 4-year intervention would increase quit rates among cigarette smokers, with heavy smokers (> or = 25 cigarettes per day) of priority. METHODS. One community within each of 11 matched community pairs (10 in the United States, 1 in Canada) was randomly assigned to intervention. Endpoint cohorts totaling 10,019 heavy smokers and 10,328 light-to-moderate smokers were followed by telephone. RESULTS. The mean heavy smoker quit rate (i.e., the fraction of cohort members who had achieved and maintained cessation at the end of the trial) was 0.180 for intervention communities versus 0.187 for comparison communities, a nonsignificant difference (one-sided P = .68 by permutation test; 90% test-based confidence interval (CI) for the difference = -0.031, 0.019). For light-to-moderate smokers, corresponding quit rates were 0.306 and 0.275; this difference was significant (P = .004; 90% CI = 0.014, 0.047). Smokers in intervention communities had greater perceived exposure to smoking control activities, which correlated with outcome only for light-to-moderate smokers. CONCLUSIONS. The impact of this community-based intervention on light-to-moderate smokers, although modest, has public health importance. This intervention did not increase quit rates of heavy smokers; reaching them may require new clinical programs and policy changes.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
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.
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
Cites
Edgington, E., Edgington, E., & Onghena, P. (2007) · doi:10.1201/9781420011814 · Cited by 2,030
Cited by
The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change.
Prochaska, J. O., & Velicer, W. F. (1997) · American Journal of Health Promotion · doi:10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.38 · Cited by 7,782
REVIEW OF COMMUNITY-BASED RESEARCH: Assessing Partnership Approaches to Improve Public Health
Israel, B. A., Schulz, A. J., Parker, E. A., & Becker, A. B. (1998) · Annual Review of Public Health · doi:10.1146/annurev.publhealth.19.1.173 · Cited by 5,893
Implementation intentions and goal achievement: a meta-analysis of effects and processes
Gollwitzer, P. M., & Sheeran, P. (2006) · Advances in Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0065-2601(06)38002-1 · Cited by 3,236
Translating Social Ecological Theory into Guidelines for Community Health Promotion
Stokols, D. (1996) · American Journal of Health Promotion · doi:10.4278/0890-1171-10.4.282 · Cited by 2,763
Behavioral science at the crossroads in public health: Extending horizons, envisioning the future
Glass, T. A., & McAtee, M. J. (2006) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.08.044 · Cited by 821
Metadata
- Venue
- American Journal of Public Health
- Publisher
- American Public Health Association
- Published
- 1995-02
- Volume
- 85
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 183-192
- ISSN
- 0090-0036 (ISSN-L)
- 1541-0048
- OpenAlex
- W2605993189
- Cited by
- 452
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 20.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation (COMMIT): I. cohort results from a four-year community intervention. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2105/ajph.85.2.183
- The paper
- Community Intervention Trial for Smoking Cessation (COMMIT): I. cohort results from a four-year community intervention. (1995). American Journal of Public Health. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.85.2.183
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.