MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3022999264

Population-based smoking cessation strategies: a summary of a select group of evidence-based reviews.

2010· article· en· W3022999264 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Medical Advisory Secretariat

Notice bibliographique

RevuePubMed · 2010
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSmoking cessationMedicineNicotine replacement therapyPopulationPsychological interventionEnvironmental healthHealth promotionFamily medicineTobacco controlPublic healthNursing
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this report was to provide the Ministry of Health Promotion (MHP) with a summary of existing evidence-based reviews of the clinical and economic outcomes of population-based smoking cessation strategies. BACKGROUND: Tobacco use is the leading cause of preventable disease and death in Ontario, linked to approximately 13,000 avoidable premature deaths annually - the vast majority of these are attributable to cancer, cardiovascular disease, and chronic obstructive lung disease. (1) In Ontario, tobacco related health care costs amount to $6.1 billion annually, or about $502 per person (including non-smokers) and account for 1.4% of the provincial domestic product. (2) In 2007, there were approximately 1.7 to 1.9 million smokers in Ontario with two-thirds of these intending to quit in the next six months and one-third wanting to quit within 30 days. (3) In 2007/2008, Ontario invested $15 million in cessation programs, services and training. (4) In June 2009, the Ministry of Health Promotion (MHP) requested that MAS provide a summary of the evidence base surrounding population-based smoking cessation strategies. PROJECT SCOPE: The MAS and the MHP agreed that the project would consist of a clinical and economic summary of the evidence surrounding nine population-based strategies for smoking cessation including: Mass media interventionsTelephone counsellingPost-secondary smoking cessation programs (colleges/universities)Community-wide stop-smoking contests (i.e. Quit and Win)Community interventionsPhysician advice to quitNursing interventions for smoking cessationHospital-based interventions for smoking cessationPharmacotherapies for smoking cessation, specifically:Nicotine replacement therapiesAntidepressantsAnxiolytic drugsOpioid antagonistsClonidineNicotine receptor partial agonistsReviews examining interventions for Cut Down to Quit (CDTQ) or harm reduction were not included in this review. In addition, reviews examining individual-level smoking cessation strategies (i.e. self-help interventions, counselling, etc.), web-based smoking cessation interventions, and smoking cessation strategies for special population groups outside of those identified from reviews included in this analysis were excluded from the scope. Information on cessation programs or strategies in other provinces or an evaluation of current population-based programs in Ontario was also not included in the scope. STATUS IN ONTARIO: In 2005, the McGuinty government launched the Smoke-Free Ontario Strategy, focusing on initiatives aimed at young people to encourage them not to smoke, protection from exposure to second-hand smoke, and programs to help smokers quit. There are currently many smoking cessation programs funded across the province and in 2007/2008, Ontario invested $15 million in cessation programs, services and training. Ontario Health Insurance Plan (OHIP) fee codes for physician advice to quit also exist. EVIDENCE-BASED ANALYSIS: RESEARCH QUESTION: What are the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of the selected population-based strategies for smoking cessation? LITERATURE SEARCH: A preliminary scan of Medline was conducted to identify major systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and health technology assessments (HTAs) in the area of smoking cessation. Based on the availability of a number of Cochrane Reviews on the topic of smoking cessation, a more systematic search of the literature was not conducted. For the economic analysis, a literature search was conducted of relevant databases for recently published article reviews, HTAs, and Cochrane Reviews of the nine identified population-based smoking cessation strategies. This analysis is limited as it is a summary of existing reviews and not a systematic review. OUTCOMES OF INTEREST: The primary outcome of interest for the clinical summary was abstinence from smoking at 6 months follow up; additional outcomes were examined where available. The primary outcomes of interest for the economic analysis were cost-effectiveness ratios. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS: The evidence suggests that pharmacotherapy, physician advice to quit, nursing interventions, hospital-based interventions, and proactive telephone counselling are effective and cost-effective in the short-term.There is poor quality data around other population-based smoking cessation strategies including mass media campaigns, community interventions, quit and win contests, access to 'quitlines', and interventions for university and college campuses, making evaluation of their effectiveness and cost-effectiveness difficult.Based on pooled summary estimates of effect and safety data, the most effective strategies are varenicline, buproprion, and nicotine replacement therapies, followed by physician advice to quit and nursing interventions (in non-hospitalized smokers without cardiovascular disease).

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,019
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Revue systématique · Signal consensuel: Revue systématique
GenreSignal candidat: Synthèse · Signal consensuel: Synthèse
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,020
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,101

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0190,045
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0030,002
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0070,007
Bibliométrie0,0200,018
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0040,004
Science ouverte0,0020,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,105
Tête enseignante GPT0,320
Écart entre enseignants0,215 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeRevue systématique
Domainenon disponible
GenreSynthèse

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations10
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuePubMed→Même sujetSmoking Behavior and Cessation→Travaux en français237 207→