↓ Skip to main content

Community-based navigators for tobacco cessation treatment: a proof-of-concept pilot study among low-income smokers

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, July 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
132 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Community-based navigators for tobacco cessation treatment: a proof-of-concept pilot study among low-income smokers
Published in
BMC Public Health, July 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12889-015-1962-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arnold H. Levinson, Patricia Valverde, Kathleen Garrett, Michele Kimminau, Emily K. Burns, Karen Albright, Debra Flynn

Abstract

A majority of continuing smokers in the United States are socioeconomically disadvantaged (SED) adults, who are less likely than others to achieve and maintain abstinence despite comparable quit-attempt rates. A national research initiative seeks effective new strategies for increasing successful smoking cessation outcomes among SED populations. There is evidence that chronic and acute stressors may interfere with SED smokers who try to quit on their own. Patient navigators have been effectively used to improve adherence to chronic disease treatment. We designed and have pilot-tested an innovative, non-clinical community-based intervention - smoking cessation treatment navigators - to determine feasibility (acceptance, adherence, and uncontrolled results) for evaluation by randomized controlled trial (RCT). The intervention was developed for smokers among parents and other household members of inner city pre-school for low-income children. Smoking cessation treatment navigators were trained and deployed to help participants choose and adhere to evidence-based cessation treatment (EBCT). Navigators provided empathy, resource-linking, problem-solving, and motivational reinforcement. Measures included rates of study follow-up completion, EBCT utilization, navigation participation, perceived intervention quality, 7-day point abstinence and longest abstinence at three months. Both complete-case and intent-to-treat analyses were performed. Eighty-five percent of study participants (n = 40) completed final data collection. More than half (53 %) enrolled in a telephone quitline and nearly three-fourths (71 %) initiated nicotine replacement therapy. Participants completed a mean 3.4 navigation sessions (mean 30 min duration) and gave the intervention very high quality and satisfaction ratings. Self-reported abstinence was comparable to rates for evidence-based cessation strategies (21 % among study completers, 18 % using intent-to-treat analysis; median 21 days abstinent among relapsers). The pilot results suggest that smoking cessation treatment navigators are feasible to study in community settings and are well-accepted for increasing use of EBCT among low-income smokers. Randomized controlled trial for efficacy is warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 132 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 131 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 20 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 14%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 10%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Other 23 17%
Unknown 28 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 28 21%
Medicine and Dentistry 26 20%
Nursing and Health Professions 13 10%
Social Sciences 10 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 13 10%
Unknown 38 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 17 September 2015.
All research outputs
#7,151,789
of 22,816,807 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#7,509
of 14,865 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#83,915
of 262,224 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#139
of 264 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,816,807 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,865 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.9. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 262,224 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 264 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.