Science Publications

Sign Up
Sign In
Submit
Current Research in Public Health
Cite This Article Share Download PDF XML
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Current Research in Public Health
  4. Archive
  5. Volume 4, Issue 2, 2024
  6. Article
Article Open Access November 04, 2024

In-Person versus Virtual CEASE Smoking Cessation Interventions

Payam Sheikhattari 1, 2, Rifath Ara Alam Barsha 3, Chidubem Egboluche 2, Adriana Foster 2 and Shervin Assari 4,*
1
Prevention Sciences Research Center, Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD, USA
2
School of Community Health & Policy, Morgan State University, Baltimore, MD, USA
3
Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
4
Charles R Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Publihed in: Current Research in Public Health (Volume 4, Issue 2, 2024)
Page(s): 71-80
DOI: 10.31586/jbls.2024.1107
Received
July 17, 2024
Revised
September 16, 2024
Accepted
October 29, 2024
Published
November 04, 2024
Keywords
: Smoking Cessation; Underserved Populations; Low-Income Smokers; Curriculum; Peer Motivation; Virtual Interventions; Self-Help; In-Person Intervention; Hybrid Intervention
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright: Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Scientific Publications
Article metrics
Views
356
Downloads
88

Cite This Article

APA Style
Sheikhattari, P. , Sheikhattari, P. Barsha, R. A. A. , Barsha, R. A. A. Egboluche, C. , Egboluche, C. Foster, A. , & Foster, A. (2024). In-Person versus Virtual CEASE Smoking Cessation Interventions. Current Research in Public Health, 4(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.31586/jbls.2024.1107
ACS Style
Sheikhattari, P. ; Sheikhattari, P. Barsha, R. A. A. ; Barsha, R. A. A. Egboluche, C. ; Egboluche, C. Foster, A. ; Foster, A. In-Person versus Virtual CEASE Smoking Cessation Interventions. Current Research in Public Health 2024 4(2), 71-80. https://doi.org/10.31586/jbls.2024.1107
Chicago/Turabian Style
Sheikhattari, Payam, Payam Sheikhattari. Rifath Ara Alam Barsha, Rifath Ara Alam Barsha. Chidubem Egboluche, Chidubem Egboluche. Adriana Foster, and Adriana Foster. 2024. "In-Person versus Virtual CEASE Smoking Cessation Interventions". Current Research in Public Health 4, no. 2: 71-80. https://doi.org/10.31586/jbls.2024.1107
AMA Style
Sheikhattari P, Sheikhattari PBarsha RAA, Barsha RAAEgboluche C, Egboluche CFoster A, Foster A. In-Person versus Virtual CEASE Smoking Cessation Interventions. Current Research in Public Health. 2024; 4(2):71-80. https://doi.org/10.31586/jbls.2024.1107 
@Article{crph1107,
AUTHOR = {Sheikhattari, Payam and Barsha, Rifath Ara Alam and Egboluche, Chidubem and Foster, Adriana and Assari, Shervin},
TITLE = {In-Person versus Virtual CEASE Smoking Cessation Interventions},
JOURNAL = {Current Research in Public Health},
VOLUME = {4},
YEAR = {2024},
NUMBER = {2},
PAGES = {71-80},
URL = {https://www.scipublications.com/journal/index.php/JBLS/article/view/1107},
ISSN = {2831-5162},
DOI = {10.31586/jbls.2024.1107},
ABSTRACT = {Background: Smoking cessation interventions are critical for underserved populations, particularly among low-income individuals who may benefit from tailored support. However, the effectiveness of different intervention formats remains unclear, particularly as virtual and hybrid models gain popularity. Aims: This study compares the effectiveness of three smoking cessation intervention arms in a quasi-experimental design: Self-help group (Arm 1), In-person group (Arm 2), and Virtual/hybrid group (Arm 3). The primary outcome was the rate of successful quit across these different intervention modalities. Methods: The study utilized a community-based intervention approach, controlling for potential confounders. The communities were randomized, and this process was blinded. The effectiveness of the In-person group and the Virtual/hybrid group was compared to the Self-help group. The odds ratio (OR) for successful quit rates was calculated for each group, with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Participants included 50.4% of women, 82.8% were Black Americans, 11.6% Whites, and 3.4% other races. In-person group (Arm 2) showed a higher rate of successful quit compared to the Self-help group (OR = 2.67, 95% CI = 1.05, 6.79). Virtual/hybrid group (Arm 3) was not associated with a significantly higher quit rate compared to the Self-help group (OR = 1.48, 95% CI = 0.57, 3.83). Conclusion: The In-person group, which utilizes the CEASE curriculum and incorporates peer motivation, proved to be significantly more effective than both the Self-help and Virtual/hybrid groups. The findings suggest that low-income, underserved smokers may not be fully prepared to benefit from virtual interventions, or the current curriculum may need adaptation to better serve their needs in a virtual format.},
}
%0 Journal Article
%A Sheikhattari, Payam
%A Barsha, Rifath Ara Alam
%A Egboluche, Chidubem
%A Foster, Adriana
%A Assari, Shervin
%D 2024
%J Current Research in Public Health

%@ 2831-5162
%V 4
%N 2
%P 71-80

%T In-Person versus Virtual CEASE Smoking Cessation Interventions
%M doi:10.31586/jbls.2024.1107
%U https://www.scipublications.com/journal/index.php/JBLS/article/view/1107

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Sheikhattari, Payam
AU  - Barsha, Rifath Ara Alam
AU  - Egboluche, Chidubem
AU  - Foster, Adriana
AU  - Assari, Shervin
TI  - In-Person versus Virtual CEASE Smoking Cessation Interventions
T2  - Current Research in Public Health
PY  - 2024
VL  - 4
IS  - 2
SN  - 2831-5162
SP  - 71
EP  - 80
UR  - https://www.scipublications.com/journal/index.php/JBLS/article/view/1107
AB  - Background: Smoking cessation interventions are critical for underserved populations, particularly among low-income individuals who may benefit from tailored support. However, the effectiveness of different intervention formats remains unclear, particularly as virtual and hybrid models gain popularity. Aims: This study compares the effectiveness of three smoking cessation intervention arms in a quasi-experimental design: Self-help group (Arm 1), In-person group (Arm 2), and Virtual/hybrid group (Arm 3). The primary outcome was the rate of successful quit across these different intervention modalities. Methods: The study utilized a community-based intervention approach, controlling for potential confounders. The communities were randomized, and this process was blinded. The effectiveness of the In-person group and the Virtual/hybrid group was compared to the Self-help group. The odds ratio (OR) for successful quit rates was calculated for each group, with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: Participants included 50.4% of women, 82.8% were Black Americans, 11.6% Whites, and 3.4% other races. In-person group (Arm 2) showed a higher rate of successful quit compared to the Self-help group (OR = 2.67, 95% CI = 1.05, 6.79). Virtual/hybrid group (Arm 3) was not associated with a significantly higher quit rate compared to the Self-help group (OR = 1.48, 95% CI = 0.57, 3.83). Conclusion: The In-person group, which utilizes the CEASE curriculum and incorporates peer motivation, proved to be significantly more effective than both the Self-help and Virtual/hybrid groups. The findings suggest that low-income, underserved smokers may not be fully prepared to benefit from virtual interventions, or the current curriculum may need adaptation to better serve their needs in a virtual format.
DO  - In-Person versus Virtual CEASE Smoking Cessation Interventions
TI  - 10.31586/jbls.2024.1107
ER  -