Trial reportNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2026
Cessation of Smoking Trial in the Emergency Department: Long-Term Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionEmergency departments (EDs) offer a valuable opportunity to deliver smoking cessation interventions. Long-term abstinence confers the maximum health benefits.
methodsAdults attending UK EDs who currently smoked were randomized to an intervention (brief advice, e-cigarette, and referral to local stop smoking services) or control (contact details for local stop smoking services). Participants were followed up at 1, 3, and 6 months as part of the main trial. Participants who consented to long-term follow-up were also contacted at approximately 18 months post randomization. For an "all participants" analysis, those who did not consent to long-term follow-up had their smoking status set at the value of the 6-month outcome. Those who did not respond were assumed to be smoking.
resultsLong-term follow-up occurred between 14 and 22 months, mean = 18 months. Long-term follow-up for those who consented to this was 35% in the intervention group (n = 145) and 34% in the control group (n = 143). For those who consented to long-term follow-up self-reported 7-day abstinence at 18 months was 12.8% in the intervention group (n = 53) and 8.33% in the control group (n = 35) (RR = 1.56, 95% CI = 1.04%-2.32%, p = .031). For all participants self-reported 7-day abstinence at long-term follow-up was 13.8% in the intervention group (n = 67) and 8.6% in the control group (n = 42) (RR = 1.61, 95% CI = 1.12%-2.31%, p = .010).
conclusionsAdults who smoke attending the ED who received a smoking cessation intervention were significantly more likely to report abstinence 18 months after randomization. IMPLICATIONS: Emergency Departments should be considered as a location for smoking cessation interventions in order to increase long-term abstinence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.