ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2026
Decision-Making on Nicotine Replacement Therapy Use and Product Selection: An Explorative Qualitative Study Among Chinese Americans Who Smoke.
Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Chinese Americans who smoke have low use of nicotine replacement therapy (NRT). This study explored perceptions of NRT and decision-making around product choice among Chinese American smokers who received NRT. From September 2023 to January 2024, we conducted in-depth phone interviews with 20 participants recruited in New York City from a WeChat-based cessation pilot trial and a community-based cessation program, both providing free nicotine patches, gum, or lozenges. Participants (aged 26-72; 85% male; 60% current smoking) included 12 consistent NRT users (≥2 weeks), four trial users (<2 weeks), and four non-users. Five participants (25%) had never heard of NRT before program enrollment, and 14 (70%) had never used it previously. Consistent users generally viewed NRT as helpful in reducing cravings. Others reported barriers, including culturally rooted skepticism toward pharmacotherapy, preference for unassisted quitting, lack of readiness to quit, prior negative experiences, and unpleasant taste or side effects. Product choice was influenced by lay knowledge, ease of integrating NRT into daily routines, perceived effectiveness, and taste and side effects. Cessation programs addressing cultural beliefs, reframing willpower, engaging individuals not ready, and providing diverse NRT options with guidance on side effect management and routine integration may increase NRT use among this population.
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.