2003
DOI: 10.1002/jclp.10131
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Self‐administered treatment for smoking cessation

Abstract: Self-administered treatment for smoking cessation has the potential to reach a broad spectrum of the population of smokers. This article focuses on self-administration of behavioral and pharmacological treatments for smoking cessation. Evidence for the effectiveness of written manuals to self-administer behavioral treatment is mixed. There is no evidence that self-help manuals alone are effective. However, they do increase quit rates when combined with personalized adjuncts such as written feedback and outreac… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2

Citation Types

0
14
0
2

Year Published

2006
2006
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 43 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 30 publications
0
14
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…The AI used in this study employed active treatment components of assessment, information, and individualized CO feedback, arguably a more stringent comparison. Assessment (Burke et al, 2003;Stotts et al, 2002) and self-monitoring of smoking behaviors (Abrams & Wilson, 1979;Foxx & Brown, 1979), as well as providing individuals with smoking information, supplying self-help materials concerning smoking behaviors, and asking questions about smoking behavior (Colby et al, 1998;Curry, Ludman, & McClure, 2003) may lead to reductions in smoking behavior. Thus, a two session MI intervention targeting smoking behavior among college students may not exceed the effects of nonspecific therapeutic factors, assessment, information, and feedback.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The AI used in this study employed active treatment components of assessment, information, and individualized CO feedback, arguably a more stringent comparison. Assessment (Burke et al, 2003;Stotts et al, 2002) and self-monitoring of smoking behaviors (Abrams & Wilson, 1979;Foxx & Brown, 1979), as well as providing individuals with smoking information, supplying self-help materials concerning smoking behaviors, and asking questions about smoking behavior (Colby et al, 1998;Curry, Ludman, & McClure, 2003) may lead to reductions in smoking behavior. Thus, a two session MI intervention targeting smoking behavior among college students may not exceed the effects of nonspecific therapeutic factors, assessment, information, and feedback.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…This assumption is consistent with the finding that the efficacy and intensity of treatment programs tend to be positively related. For example, research on smoking cessation interventions—including self-help approaches—has illustrated the relationship between abstinence rates and program intensity, typically defined as contact time and number of sessions [4,39,40]. Williams et al [41] have coined the term program thickness to refer to the "collective intensity, duration, delivery agent, and intervention modality" of an intervention.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The same pattern is suggested by the results of the relatively few SLT cessation intervention studies. Yet minimal-contact, low-intensity self-help interventions offer the promise of producing a substantial impact on public health because they can reach a large percentage of the target population of tobacco users (Curry, Ludman, & McClure, 2003;Glasgow, Vogt, & Boles, 1999;Lichtenstein, 2002).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%