Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers?
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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 t...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2005-05-01
|
| Series: | BMC Public Health |
| Online Access: | http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/5/52 |
| _version_ | 1818040200743354368 |
|---|---|
| author | Gilljam Hans Björnström Catrine Tomson Tanja Helgason Asgeir |
| author_facet | Gilljam Hans Björnström Catrine Tomson Tanja Helgason Asgeir |
| author_sort | Gilljam Hans |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Treating non-responders as smokers in smoking cessation research may underestimate the true effect of cessation treatment.</p> |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-10T08:10:45Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-02d3233075404905a111faa965f042ca |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1471-2458 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-10T08:10:45Z |
| publishDate | 2005-05-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Public Health |
| spelling | doaj.art-02d3233075404905a111faa965f042ca2022-12-22T01:56:35ZengBMCBMC Public Health1471-24582005-05-01515210.1186/1471-2458-5-52Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers?Gilljam HansBjörnström CatrineTomson TanjaHelgason Asgeir<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>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.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Treating non-responders as smokers in smoking cessation research may underestimate the true effect of cessation treatment.</p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/5/52 |
| spellingShingle | Gilljam Hans Björnström Catrine Tomson Tanja Helgason Asgeir Are non-responders in a quitline evaluation more likely to be smokers? BMC Public Health |
| 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 |
| url | http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/5/52 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT gilljamhans arenonrespondersinaquitlineevaluationmorelikelytobesmokers AT bjornstromcatrine arenonrespondersinaquitlineevaluationmorelikelytobesmokers AT tomsontanja arenonrespondersinaquitlineevaluationmorelikelytobesmokers AT helgasonasgeir arenonrespondersinaquitlineevaluationmorelikelytobesmokers |