↓ Skip to main content

Study protocol for a non-inferiority trial of cytisine versus nicotine replacement therapy in people motivated to stop smoking

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Public Health, November 2011
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
101 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
Study protocol for a non-inferiority trial of cytisine versus nicotine replacement therapy in people motivated to stop smoking
Published in
BMC Public Health, November 2011
DOI 10.1186/1471-2458-11-880
Pubmed ID
Authors

Natalie Walker, Colin Howe, Chris Bullen, Hayden McRobbie, Marewa Glover, Varsha Parag, Jonathan Williman, Reon Veale, Vili Nosa, Joanne Barnes

Abstract

Smokers need effective support to maximise the chances of successful quit attempts. Current smoking cessation medications, such as nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), bupropion, nortriptyline or varenicline, have been shown to be effective in clinical trials but are underused by smokers attempting to quit due to adverse effects, contraindications, low acceptability and/or high cost. Cytisine is a low-cost, plant-based alkaloid that has been sold as a smoking cessation aid in Eastern Europe for 50 years. A systematic review of trial evidence suggests that cytisine has a positive impact on both short- and long-term abstinence rates compared to placebo. However, the quality of the evidence is poor and insufficient for licensing purposes in many Western countries. A large, well-conducted placebo-controlled trial (n = 740) of cytisine for smoking cessation has recently been published and confirms the findings of earlier studies, with 12-month continuous abstinence rates of 8.4% in the cytisine group compared to 2.4% in the placebo group (Relative risk = 3.4, 95% confidence intervals 1.7-7.1). No research has yet been undertaken to determine the effectiveness of cytisine relative to that of NRT.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 101 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 98 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 16 16%
Student > Master 14 14%
Student > Bachelor 11 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 6%
Other 16 16%
Unknown 29 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 22 22%
Psychology 11 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 7%
Social Sciences 7 7%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 4 4%
Other 18 18%
Unknown 32 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 06 December 2011.
All research outputs
#17,652,807
of 22,659,164 outputs
Outputs from BMC Public Health
#12,347
of 14,741 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#191,253
of 239,294 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Public Health
#158
of 184 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,659,164 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 14,741 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 13th percentile – i.e., 13% 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 239,294 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 184 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.