Offering nicotine patches to all households in a community with high smoking rates: Pilot test of a population-based approach to promote tobacco cessation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The objective of this project is to determine the effectiveness of targeting a community with a high smoking rate with the distribution of free-of-charge nicotine patches in order to promote tobacco cessation. METHODS/DESIGN: One small community with an elevated smoking rate (compared to national and provincial averages) has been identified. All households in the community will be sent a letter offering one smoker (18 years or older; 10 or more cigarettes per day) in the household a free-of-charge mailed five-week supply of nicotine patches (up to a total of 800 five-week kits will be available for distribution). Participants receiving nicotine patches will be asked to complete a six-month follow-up survey assessing tobacco cessation defined as 30-day point prevalence abstinence. In addition, attempts will be made to employ ongoing national population surveys containing cigarette smoking variables to compare changes in smoking prevalence in the target community to other communities with similar characteristics. DISCUSSION: We will examine whether the concentrated distribution of mailed nicotine patches will result in a measurable reduction in smoking rates in the target community. If demonstrated, this would provide support for the targeted population-level distribution of an effective individual-level public health intervention. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT04534231.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".