MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091559396 · doi:10.1093/ntr/ntu087

Addressing the Evidence for FDA Nicotine Replacement Therapy Label Changes: A Policy Statement of the Association for the Treatment of Tobacco Use and Dependence and the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco

2014· article· en· W2091559396 on OpenAlexaff
Lisa M. Fucito, Matthew P Bars, Ariadna Forray, Alana M. Rojewski, Saul Shiffman, Peter Selby, Robert West, Jonathan Foulds, Benjamin A. Toll

Bibliographic record

VenueNicotine & Tobacco Research · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismEconomic and Social Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Cancer InstituteCancer Research UK
KeywordsNicotine replacement therapyMedicineSmoking cessationFood and drug administrationPsychological interventionNicotineNicotine patchExtant taxonAlternative medicineFamily medicineEnvironmental healthPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cigarette smoking creates a substantial public health burden. Identifying new, effective smoking cessation interventions that optimize existing interventions and promoting effective use of approved medications is a priority. When used as directed, nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) aids smoking cessation, but there is opportunity for improving its effectiveness. Until recently, NRT use guidelines advised smokers to begin using NRT on their quit date, only to use 1 NRT formulation at a time, to refrain from using NRT while smoking, and to stop NRT within 3 months regardless of progress. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a recent announcement allowing for NRT labeling changes with applications from pharmaceutical companies for such changes, and we applaud this decision. Nevertheless, additional revisions are warranted by current research. There is robust evidence that combining a longer-acting form (e.g., patch) with a shorter-acting form (e.g., lozenge) is more effective than NRT monotherapy and is safe. Moreover, extant evidence suggests that NRT use prior to a quit attempt or for smoking reduction as part of a quit attempt is safe and as effective as starting NRT on quit date. Specifically, prequit nicotine patch increases quit rates and may engage additional recalcitrant smokers. Last, NRT use longer than 3 months is safe and may be beneficial for relapse prevention in some smokers. This report summarizes the FDA announcement, reviews the evidence for further revisions to current FDA NRT guidelines, and makes recommendations for over-the-counter (OTC) NRT labeling to allow for (1) combined use of faster-acting NRT medications with nicotine patch, (2) nicotine patch use prior to quit date or NRT for smoking reduction as part of a quit attempt, and (3) prolonged NRT for up to 6 months without healthcare provider consultation.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.168
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.293
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.168
Threshold uncertainty score0.889

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1680.293
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.009
Bibliometrics0.0060.006
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0140.014
Open science0.0090.004
Research integrity0.0610.031
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.011

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.534
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.007 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations34
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNicotine & Tobacco ResearchSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207