23 research outputs found

    Use and perceived helpfulness of smoking cessation methods: results from a population survey of recent quitters

    Get PDF
    <p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Increasing rates of smoking cessation is one of the most effective measures available to improve population health. To advance the goal of increasing successful cessation at the population level, it is imperative that we understand more about smokers' use of cessation methods, as well as the helpfulness of those methods in real-world experiences of quitting. In this survey of recent quitters, we simultaneously examined rates of use and perceived helpfulness of various cessation methods.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Recent quitters (within 12 months; n = 1097) completed a telephone survey including questions relating to 13 cessation methods. Indices of use and perceived helpfulness for each method were plotted in a quadrant analysis. Socio-demographic differences were explored using bivariate and multivariate analyses.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>From the quadrant analysis, cold turkey, NRT and gradual reduction before quitting had high use and helpfulness; GP advice had high use and lower helpfulness. Prescribed medication and online programs had low use but high helpfulness. Remaining methods had low use and helpfulness. Younger quitters were more likely to use unassisted methods such as cold turkey; older or less educated quitters were more likely to use assisted methods such as prescribed medication or advice from a general practitioner.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The majority of recent quitters quit cold turkey or cut down before quitting, and reported that these methods were helpful. Efforts to influence population smoking prevalence should attempt to provide support and motivation for smokers choosing these methods, in addition to assessing the effectiveness and accessibility of other methods for smokers who need or choose them.</p

    Is exposure to formaldehyde in air causally associated with leukemia?—A hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence analysis

    Get PDF
    Recent scientific debate has focused on the potential for inhaled formaldehyde to cause lymphohematopoietic cancers, particularly leukemias, in humans. The concern stems from certain epidemiology studies reporting an association, although particulars of endpoints and dosimetry are inconsistent across studies and several other studies show no such effects. Animal studies generally report neither hematotoxicity nor leukemia associated with formaldehyde inhalation, and hematotoxicity studies in humans are inconsistent. Formaldehyde's reactivity has been thought to preclude systemic exposure following inhalation, and its apparent inability to reach and affect the target tissues attacked by known leukemogens has, heretofore, led to skepticism regarding its potential to cause human lymphohematopoietic cancers. Recently, however, potential modes of action for formaldehyde leukemogenesis have been hypothesized, and it has been suggested that formaldehyde be identified as a known human leukemogen. In this article, we apply our hypothesis-based weight-of-evidence (HBWoE) approach to evaluate the large body of evidence regarding formaldehyde and leukemogenesis, attending to how human, animal, and mode-of-action results inform one another. We trace the logic of inference within and across all studies, and articulate how one could account for the suite of available observations under the various proposed hypotheses. Upon comparison of alternative proposals regarding what causal processes may have led to the array of observations as we see them, we conclude that the case fora causal association is weak and strains biological plausibility. Instead, apparent association between formaldehyde inhalation and leukemia in some human studies is better interpreted as due to chance or confounding

    Scientific assessment of the use of sugars as cigarette tobacco ingredients: A review of published and other publicly available studies

    Get PDF
    Sugars, such as sucrose or invert sugar, have been used as tobacco ingredients in American-blend cigarettes to replenish the sugars lost during curing of the Burley component of the blended tobacco in order to maintain a balanced flavor. Chemical-analytical studies of the mainstream smoke of research cigarettes with various sugar application levels revealed that most of the smoke constituents determined did not show any sugar-related changes in yields (per mg nicotine), while ten constituents were found to either increase (formaldehyde, acrolein, 2-butanone, isoprene, benzene, toluene, benzo[k]fluoranthene) or decrease (4-aminobiphenyl, N-nitrosodimethylamine, N-nitrosonornicotine) in a statistically significant manner with increasing sugar application levels. Such constituent yields were modeled into constituent uptake distributions using simulations of nicotine uptake distributions generated on the basis of published nicotine biomonitoring data, which were multiplied by the constituent/nicotine ratios determined in the current analysis. These simulations revealed extensive overlaps for the constituent uptake distributions with and without sugar application. Moreover, the differences in smoke composition did not lead to relevant changes in the activity in in vitro or in vivo assays. The potential impact of using sugars as tobacco ingredients was further assessed in an indirect manner by comparing published data from markets with predominantly American-blend or Virginia-type (no added sugars) cigarettes. No relevant difference was found between these markets for smoking prevalence, intensity, some markers of dependence, nicotine uptake, or mortality from smoking-related lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. In conclusion, thorough examination of the data available suggests that the use of sugars as ingredients in cigarette tobacco does not increase the inherent risk and harm of cigarette smoking

    Positioning the principles of precision medicine in care pathways for allergic rhinitis and chronic rhinosinusitis - A EUFOREA-ARIA-EPOS-AIRWAYS ICP statement.

    Get PDF
    Precision medicine (PM) is increasingly recognized as the way forward for optimizing patient care. Introduced in the field of oncology, it is now considered of major interest in other medical domains like allergy and chronic airway diseases, which face an urgent need to improve the level of disease control, enhance patient satisfaction and increase effectiveness of preventive interventions. The combination of personalized care, prediction of treatment success, prevention of disease and patient participation in the elaboration of the treatment plan is expected to substantially improve the therapeutic approach for individuals suffering from chronic disabling conditions. Given the emerging data on the impact of patient stratification on treatment outcomes, European and American regulatory bodies support the principles of PM and its potential advantage over current treatment strategies. The aim of the current document was to propose a consensus on the position and gradual implementation of the principles of PM within existing adult treatment algorithms for allergic rhinitis (AR) and chronic rhinosinusitis (CRS). At the time of diagnosis, prediction of success of the initiated treatment and patient participation in the decision of the treatment plan can be implemented. The second-level approach ideally involves strategies to prevent progression of disease, in addition to prediction of success of therapy, and patient participation in the long-term therapeutic strategy. Endotype-driven treatment is part of a personalized approach and should be positioned at the tertiary level of care, given the efforts needed for its implementation and the high cost of molecular diagnosis and biological treatment
    corecore