Skip to main content

Table 2 Cessation studies – methodological design

From: Effects of sixty six adolescent tobacco use cessation trials and seventeen prospective studies of self-initiated quitting

Investigators

Methodological design

Biochemical validation?

Ary et al.

Experimental – two condition: multigrade level (6th through 11th) social influence prevention, standard care; also parent messages randomly assigned to 12 schools within program condition

Yes

Aveyard et al.

Experimental – two condition: expert system and three class sessions based on transtheoretical model, standard health education (a little to motivate quitting)

No

Baskerville, Hotte, Dunkley

Quasi-experimental – quit-and-win contest and smoke free month, standard care control

Yes

Bauman et al.

Experimental – family program, standard care control

No

Beaglehole et al.

Quasi-experimental – classroom program, standard care control

No

Biener et al.

Single-group – random digit dialing

No

Chakravorty

Experimental – three condition: mintsnuff, chewing gum control, lecture only

Yes

Charlton

Quasi-experimental – pilot clinic ("courses"), self-help

Yes

Cinnomin, Sussman

Experimental – two condition: social influence/stress-coping, chemical addiction

Yes

Colby et al.

Experimental – two condition: motivational interview, brief advice

Yes

Coleman-Wallace et al.

Quasi-experimental – three condition: Tobacco Education Program (TEG) for precontemplators, Tobacco Awareness Program (TAP) for those who want to quit, control; 57% mandatory-punish (in TEG)

Yes

Corby et al.

Single-group – within subject replicated ABA design, 1 week each with a two week follow-up

Yes

Digiusto

Quasi-experimental – three condition: lunchtime quit clinic, class-time quit clinic, standard care control

Yes

Dino et al.

Quasi-experimental – two condition: not on tobacco (NOT), brief intervention

Yes

Eakin, Severson, Glasgow

Single-group – within subject replicated AB design

Yes

Etter, Ronchi, Perneger

Quasi-experimental – two condition: smoke-free program-four buildings/limited areas/cessation counseling service, control (other buildings)

No

Fibkins

Single-group – 1 group clinic

No

Forster et al.

Experimental – two condition: policy program, standard care control

No

Glasgow et al.

Experimental – two condition: brief intervention, simple advice to quit smoking

Yes

Glover

Single-group – two pilot clinics

Yes

Goldberg, Gorn

Quasi-experimental – two condition: personal involvement, standard care control

No, did use behavioral observation

Greenberg, Deputat

Quasi-experimental – four condition: fear, facts, values, standard care control

No

Hafstad, Aaro, Langmark

Single-group – mass media campaign for teens

No

Horn et al.

Quasi-experimental – two condition: not on tobacco (NOT), brief intervention

Yes

Horswell, Horton

Quasi-experimental – peer led school clinic, standard care control

No

Hotte et al.

Quasi-experimental – quit 4 life small groups plus kit, quit 4 life self-help kit-only

No

Hurt et al.

Single-group – nicotine patch therapy

Yes

Jason, Mollica, Ferrone

Quasi-experimental – 3 condition: role-play plus discussion, discussion-only, control

Yes

Jerome

Single-group – Life Sign computer assisted

Yes

Johnson et al.

Quasi-experimental – 4 condition: social curriculum/familiar media role models, social curriculum/unfamiliar media role models, health curriculum/familiar media role models, health curriculum/unfamiliar media role models

Yes

Kempf, Stanley

Quasi-experimental – 2 condition: smoke-free policy, standard care control

No

Killen et al.

Quasi-experimental – 2 condition: special intervention, standard care control

Yes

Lampkin

Single-group – pretest-posttest (averaged follow-up)

No

Librett

Single-group – pretest-posttest

No

Lotecka, McWhinney

Quasi-experimental – two condition: matched groups: coping, information

No

Matson-Koffman, Miller

Single-group – quit and win/tobacco free teens, school clinic

NR

McDonald, Roberts, Deeschaemaker

Single-group – consecutive cohorts

No

Mills, Ewy, Dizon

Single-group – two cohorts, senior high and junior high

No

Murray, Prokhorov, Harty

Quasi-experimental – two condition: statewide anti-smoking campaign in Minnesota, Wisconsin as control; sequential 9th grade cohorts

No

Myers, Brown

Single-group – consecutive cohorts

No

Myers, Brown, Kelly

Single-group – consecutive cohorts at three facilities

Yes

Pallonen

Single-group – feasibility study

Yes

Patten et al.

Single-group – retrospective cohort study

Yes, at baseline only

Patterson

Single-group – feasibility study

No

Pendell

Single-group – consecutive cohorts

No

Perry et al.

Quasi-experimental – two condition: special intervention, standard care control

Yes

Perry et al.

Experimental – three condition: long-term health effects, social consequences, physiological effects; also two teaching modalities (teacher, college student)

Yes

Peters

Single-group – quit 4 life self-help kit requesters

No

Peterson, Clark

Quasi-experimental – two condition: discussion group, standard care control group

No

Popham et al.

Single-group – state-wide: looks at those exposed and not exposed to campaign

No

Prince

Quasi-experimental – three condition: peer led, adult led, standard care control group

No

Quinlan, McCaul

Experimental – three condition: stage-matched (to precontemplation stages of change), stage-mismatched (action material offered), assessment only

No

Rigotti et al.

Quasi-experimental – two condition: enforcement or non-enforcement of tobacco sales laws

No

Skjoldebrand, Gahnberg

Single-group – all teens who came to the clinic for check-ups

No

Smith et al.

Single-group – non-randomized open label trial

Yes

St. Pierre, Shute, Jaycox

Single-group-group clinic pilot of ACS I-Quit

No

Suedfeld et al.

Experimental – four condition: use of sensory deprivation (Senory D) chamber or not, with a tobacco use health consequences message or not

No

Sussman, Burton et al.

Experimental – three condition: psychosocial dependency, chemical addiction, wait list control

Yes

Sussman, Dent, Lichtman

Experimental – three condition: clinic plus school-as-community, clinic only, standard care control

Yes

Sussman, Dent, Stacy

Experimental – three condition: health educator led classroom, self-instruction, standard care control

Yes

Townsend et al.

Single-group – "1-shot"

No

Vartiainen et al.

Single-group-quit-and win approach

Yes

Wakefield et al.

Nation-wide survey of the extent of smoking restrictions on teen smoking

No

Weisman et al.

Single-group-AB design

Yes

Zavela, Harrison, Owens

Experimental – three condition: mint snuff, bubble gum, comparison (no oral substitute lecture-only group)

No

Zheng

Single-group – quit clinic pilot

Yes

  1. NR = not reported.