IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aph/ajpbhl/1990805554-559_6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative evaluation of American Cancer Society and American Lung Association smoking cessation clinics

Author

Listed:
  • Lando, H.A.
  • McGovern, P.G.
  • Barrios, F.X.
  • Etringer, B.D.

Abstract

We compared the effectiveness of American Cancer Society, FreshStart, American Lung Association, Freedom from Smoking, and laboratory clinic methods in subjects (N = 1041) from three communities. Three-month follow-up results favored the laboratory method over the two public service approaches on both a prevalence and a sustained abstinence measure. At one-year follow-up, treatment effects for smoking prevalence were no longer significant. However, sustained abstinence results at one-year remained highly significant and favored the more intensive laboratory and Freedom from Smoking clinics over the FreshStart method. FreshStart fared less well than the other interventions both in producing initial quit attempts and in sustaining abstinence among initial quitters. It should be noted, however, that FreshStart requires considerably less facilitator contact than do the other approaches. Unexpected outcome effects occurred for treatment location. Future clinic programs should include a specific target date for quitting and should place more emphasis upon recycling participants who fail to sustain abstinence.

Suggested Citation

  • Lando, H.A. & McGovern, P.G. & Barrios, F.X. & Etringer, B.D., 1990. "Comparative evaluation of American Cancer Society and American Lung Association smoking cessation clinics," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 80(5), pages 554-559.
  • Handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1990:80:5:554-559_6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aph:ajpbhl:1990:80:5:554-559_6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Christopher F Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.apha.org .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.