Final Research Report
View this project's final research report.
|Article Highlight: Among smokers with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the number who quit after receiving 23 months of nicotine-replacement therapy (NRT) and six counseling sessions was nearly the same as the number who quit after receiving 10 weeks of NRT and four counseling sessions, according to findings of this study published in JAMA Network Open. While there were insignificant differences in the number of cigarettes smoked per day between the groups, both saw decreases in exposure to unhealthy chemicals and adverse cardiac events. The study followed nearly 400 adults.|
Long-Term Nicotine Replacement Therapy for Smokers with Lung Disease
A narrative on smoking cessation and how graducal tactics might be more successful than a cold-turkey approach for some high-risk smokers.
Peer review of PCORI-funded research helps make sure the report presents complete, balanced, and useful information about the research. It also confirms that the research has followed PCORI’s Methodology Standards. During peer review, experts who were not members of the research team read a draft report of the research. These experts may include a scientist focused on the research topic, a specialist in research methods, a patient or caregiver, and a healthcare professional. Reviewers do not have conflicts of interest with the study.
The peer reviewers point out where the draft report may need revision. For example, they may suggest ways to improve how the research team analyzed its results or reported its conclusions. Learn more about PCORI’s peer-review process here.
In response to peer review, the PI made changes including
- Adding information in the abstract and limitations that the study could not identify and assess participant subgroups because there were such low rates of smoking cessation overall
- Clarifying how both the intervention and comparison conditions were meant to help smokers quit smoking, but that the intervention approach was more gradual, focused on reducing smoking first until the smoker could quit
- Providing more information about the sensitivity analyses conducted as part of the study. The investigators chose to count any patients missing outcome data as continued smokers, which led to more conservative but essentially the same results as the prespecified analyses
- Revised language in the study conclusions to accurately reflect that the data did not clearly show a faster response in either group over time, because the results of time by group interaction tests did not reach statistical significance
Conflict of Interest Disclosures
View the COI disclosure form.