Cargando…
Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers?
BACKGROUND: In evaluation of smoking cessation programs including surveys and clinical trials the tradition has been to treat non-responders as smokers. The aim of this paper is to assess smoking behaviour of non-responders in an evaluation of the Swedish national tobacco cessation quitline a nation...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2005
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1173115/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15910682 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-5-52 |
_version_ | 1782124460857360384 |
---|---|
author | Tomson, Tanja Björnström, Catrine Gilljam, Hans Helgason, Asgeir |
author_facet | Tomson, Tanja Björnström, Catrine Gilljam, Hans Helgason, Asgeir |
author_sort | Tomson, Tanja |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In evaluation of smoking cessation programs including surveys and clinical trials the tradition has been to treat non-responders as smokers. The aim of this paper is to assess smoking behaviour of non-responders in an evaluation of the Swedish national tobacco cessation quitline a nation-wide, free of charge service. METHODS: A telephone interview survey with a sample of people not participating in the original follow-up. The study population comprised callers to the Swedish quitline who had consented to participate in a 12 month follow-up but had failed to respond. A sample of 84 (18% of all non-responders) was included. The main outcome measures were self-reported smoking behaviour at the time of the interview and at the time of the routine follow-up. Also, reasons for not responding to the original follow-up questionnaire were assessed. For statistical comparison between groups we used Fischer's exact test, odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) on proportions and OR. RESULTS: Thirty-nine percent reported to have been smoke-free at the time they received the original questionnaire compared with 31% of responders in the original study population. The two most common reasons stated for not having returned the original questionnaire was claiming that they had returned it (35%) and that they had not received the questionnaire (20%). Non-responders were somewhat younger and were to a higher degree smoke-free when they first called the quitline. CONCLUSION: Treating non-responders as smokers in smoking cessation research may underestimate the true effect of cessation treatment. |
format | Text |
id | pubmed-1173115 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2005 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-11731152005-07-07 Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers? Tomson, Tanja Björnström, Catrine Gilljam, Hans Helgason, Asgeir BMC Public Health Research Article BACKGROUND: In evaluation of smoking cessation programs including surveys and clinical trials the tradition has been to treat non-responders as smokers. The aim of this paper is to assess smoking behaviour of non-responders in an evaluation of the Swedish national tobacco cessation quitline a nation-wide, free of charge service. METHODS: A telephone interview survey with a sample of people not participating in the original follow-up. The study population comprised callers to the Swedish quitline who had consented to participate in a 12 month follow-up but had failed to respond. A sample of 84 (18% of all non-responders) was included. The main outcome measures were self-reported smoking behaviour at the time of the interview and at the time of the routine follow-up. Also, reasons for not responding to the original follow-up questionnaire were assessed. For statistical comparison between groups we used Fischer's exact test, odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) on proportions and OR. RESULTS: Thirty-nine percent reported to have been smoke-free at the time they received the original questionnaire compared with 31% of responders in the original study population. The two most common reasons stated for not having returned the original questionnaire was claiming that they had returned it (35%) and that they had not received the questionnaire (20%). Non-responders were somewhat younger and were to a higher degree smoke-free when they first called the quitline. CONCLUSION: Treating non-responders as smokers in smoking cessation research may underestimate the true effect of cessation treatment. BioMed Central 2005-05-23 /pmc/articles/PMC1173115/ /pubmed/15910682 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-5-52 Text en Copyright © 2005 Tomson et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Tomson, Tanja Björnström, Catrine Gilljam, Hans Helgason, Asgeir Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers? |
title | Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers? |
title_full | Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers? |
title_fullStr | Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers? |
title_full_unstemmed | Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers? |
title_short | Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers? |
title_sort | are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers? |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1173115/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15910682 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-5-52 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT tomsontanja arenonrespondersinaquitlineevaluationmorelikelytobesmokers AT bjornstromcatrine arenonrespondersinaquitlineevaluationmorelikelytobesmokers AT gilljamhans arenonrespondersinaquitlineevaluationmorelikelytobesmokers AT helgasonasgeir arenonrespondersinaquitlineevaluationmorelikelytobesmokers |