Responses
Other responses
Jump to comment:
- Published on: 18 January 2006
- Published on: 17 July 2003
- Published on: 18 January 2006Response to Impact vs. Efficacy for Pregnant SmokersShow More
Prochaska and Velicer have commented on this trial(1), and, having been alerted to this comment elsewhere, we feel we need to respond belatedly. They suggest the study had important flaws but do not name them. We drew attention to those flaws in the conduct of the study in the report. The major flaw was that midwives in the control arm were less enthused about the intervention and complied with the protocol less well,...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared. - Published on: 17 July 2003Impact vs. Efficacy for Pregnant SmokersShow More
Lawrence et al. (2003) reported the results of their cluster RCT on smoking cessation in pregnant women comparing (1) standard care; (2) Transtheoretical Model (TTM) based manuals; and (3) TTM computer based tailored communications.1 In spite of serious flaws in this study, there were very important results that the authors overlooked. They do not seem to appreciate that this was a population-based trial where the goal...
Conflict of Interest:
None declared.