MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3159723634 · doi:10.1093/ntr/ntab082

A Comparison of Quit Outcomes for Men and Women in a Smoking Cessation Program Offering Personalized Nicotine Replacement Therapy and Counseling in Primary Care Clinics

2021· article· en· W3159723634 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Sabrina Voci, Scott Veldhuizen, Stephanie Tien, Megan Barker, Nadia Minian, Peter Selby, Laurie Zawertailo

Bibliographic record

VenueNicotine & Tobacco Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsPublic Health OntarioUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersOntario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care
KeywordsMedicineNicotine replacement therapySmoking cessationAbstinenceNicotine patchNicotineYoung adultTelephone counselingDemographyPhysical therapyInternal medicinePsychiatryAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Women may have greater difficulty achieving long-term abstinence following a quit attempt compared to men. We sought to determine whether there were differences in treatment characteristics or outcome between female and male primary care patients enrolled in a smoking cessation program providing personalized nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) with counseling support. AIMS AND METHODS: The sample included 27 601 Ontarians (53% female, 47% male) who enrolled in the Smoking Treatment for Ontario Patients program between 2016 and 2018. Dose, type, and duration of NRT supplied were personalized to need. Thirty-day point prevalence tobacco smoking abstinence was self-reported via online or telephone survey at 6 months after enrollment. RESULTS: Both female and male participants received a median of 8 weeks of NRT. Types of NRT received were similar, with 80% of both female and male participants receiving patch and short-acting NRT. The total cumulative dose was somewhat higher for men (1373 mg vs. 1265 mg, p < .001); but when calculated as dose per day, per cigarette smoked at baseline, the dose was slightly higher among women (1.6 mg vs. 1.5 mg, p < .001). Quit rates at 6 months were lower for women versus men (24% vs. 27%; adjusted OR = 0.84 [95% CI = 0.78 to 0.90], p < .001). There were no significant interactions between gender and dose, type, or duration of NRT supplied. CONCLUSIONS: Women were slightly less likely to quit than men, despite receiving similar treatment. There was no evidence that women benefitted more or less from variations in dose, type, or duration of NRT supplied. IMPLICATIONS: Women who received personalized NRT with counseling support in a primary care setting had lower quit success than men. Although the absolute difference in quit outcome was small, the public health impact may be large given the burden of disease associated with continued smoking. NRT supplied was similar for women and men, and there was no evidence upon which to suggest tailoring the dose, duration, or type, based on gender alone. Further research to identify the underlying biological and social factors responsible for reduced quit success will help identify ways to optimize treatment for women.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.138
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.324 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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