Biomedical subjects

Scott Leischow

Publications and source records attributed to Scott Leischow.

6 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2006

Efficacy of the nicotine inhaler in smoking reduction: A double-blind, randomized trial.

Many smokers are not ready to quit but are interested in changing their smoking behavior, particularly if such a change is associated with a reduction in health risk. The present study evaluated the efficacy of the nicotine inhaler in reducing smoking. Exploratory studies assessed whether reduction in smoking was associated with reduction in markers of disease risk. A total of 429 healthy smokers (smoking at least 20 cigarettes/day) were randomly assigned to either nicotine-containing or placebo inhalers, which subjects were allowed to use ad libitum for up to 1 year. The nicotine inhaler was significantly superior to placebo in achieving reduction in daily cigarette consumption by at least 50% after 4 months, compared with baseline (18% vs. 8%, p = .004). Active treatment promoted smoking cessation: 8% of subjects in the nicotine group and 1% in the placebo group were abstinent at month 15. Throughout the study, smoking reduction, per se, independent of treatment group, was associated with a statistically significant decrease in exhaled carbon monoxide and serum cotinine and thiocyanate. Smoking reduction also improved established risk markers for cardiovascular disease over 4 months. The incidence of adverse events did not differ significantly between the active and placebo groups. The most common treatment-related adverse events were throat irritation and cough. In conclusion, the nicotine inhaler can help smokers who are unable or unwilling to quit to reduce daily cigarette consumption, which may be a health benefit on its own and may further promote quitting.

Administration, Inhalation↗

PubMed2005

Methods to assess potential reduced exposure products.

The availability of tobacco products purported to reduce toxin exposure or potentially reduce health risks necessitates the development of methods and identification of biomarkers that can be used to assess these products. These assessments occur on multiple levels and stages, from identifying constituents in the tobacco products and smoke, to human exposure and health effects trials, to postmarketing surveillance. A conference of multidisciplinary experts was convened to present and discuss methods and biomarkers to assess these products and to consider the infrastructure necessary to facilitate the evaluation process. Although no currently available set of measures was thought to be sufficient for determining the relative health risk of potential reduced exposure products, this paper provides a blueprint for future research toward this end.

Biomarkers↗

PubMed2005

Building capacity for international tobacco control research: the global tobacco research network.

The Global Tobacco Research Network (GTRN) was developed to enhance global tobacco control research through information sharing and collaboration among researchers. The formation of the GTRN is timely because of the need to ratify, implement, and track the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. While the spectrum of international tobacco control research continues to expand, resources to support these efforts are still quite limited. As an issue-specific network focused on information sharing and capacity building associated with tobacco control research, the GTRN will provide an opportunity for enhancing the effectiveness of tobacco control initiatives.

Cooperative Behavior↗

PubMed2002

Reducing tobacco harm: research challenges and issues.

The emergence of potential reduced-exposure tobacco and cigarette-like products and the reduction of smoking as a treatment approach, have recently been forcing the debate and discussion about the science that is necessary to inform policies, regulation, and programs. To deal effectively with the issues evolving around tobacco harm reduction, a comprehensive and strategic research agenda must be forged, and a multi-disciplinary, collaborative approach must be taken. The goal of this article is to describe research challenges and issues related to tobacco exposure and harm reduction. Scientists from multiple disciplines and individuals from government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and tobacco control advocacy groups as well as the pharmaceutical and tobacco industries attended a two-day meeting that focused on addressing the current knowledge regarding tobacco harm reduction, identifying gaps in knowledge, and recommending research directions. Workgroups, comprising a subset of attendees, met after the conference to synthesize, discuss, and prioritize the important research frontiers. The resulting document provides guidance for scientists, grant funding agencies, industry and policy makers by identifying areas in which to invest research effort and funds to develop a science base to ensure the future health of this nation and world.

Communication↗

PubMedDate not supplied

An integrative framework for community partnering to translate theory into effective health promotion strategy.

INTRODUCTION: Although there is general agreement about the complex interplay among individual-, family-, organizational-, and community-level factors as they influence health outcomes, there is still a gap between health promotion research and practice. The authors suggest that a disjuncture exists between the multiple theories and models of health promotion and the practitioner's need for a more unified set of guidelines for comprehensive planning of programs. Therefore, we put forward in this paper an idea toward closing the gap between research and practice, a case for developing an overarching framework--with several health promotion models that could integrate existing theories--and applying it to comprehensive health promotion strategy. AN INTEGRATIVE FRAMEWORK: We outline a theoretical foundation for future health promotion research and practice that integrates four models: the social ecology; the Life Course Health Development; the Predisposing, Reinforcing, and Enabling Constructs in Educational/Environmental Diagnosis and Evaluation-Policy, Regulatory and Organizational Constructs in Educational and Environmental Development; and the community partnering models. The first three models are well developed and complementary. There is little consensus on the latter model, community partnering. However, we suggest that such a model is a vital part of an overall framework, and we present an approach to reconciling theoretical tensions among researchers and practitioners involved in community health promotion. INTEGRATING THE MODELS: THE NEED FOR SYSTEMS THEORY AND THINKING: Systems theory has been relatively ignored both by the health promotion field and, more generally, by the health services. We make a case for greater use of systems theory in the development of an overall framework, both to improve integration and to incorporate key concepts from the diverse systems literatures of other disciplines. VISION FOR HEALTHY COMMUNITIES: (1) Researchers and practitioners understand the complex interplay among individual-, family-, organizational-, and community-level factors as they influence population health; (2) health promotion researchers and practitioners collaborate effectively with others in the community to create integrated strategies that work as a system to address a wide array of health-related factors; (3) The Healthy People Objectives for the Nation includes balanced indicators to reflect health promotion realities and research-measures effects on all levels; (4) the gap between community health promotion "best practices" guidelines and the way things work in the everyday world of health promotion practice has been substantially closed. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: We suggest critical next steps toward closing the gap between health promotion research and practice: investing in networks that promote, support, and sustain ongoing dialogue and sharing of experience; finding common ground in an approach to community partnering; and gaining consensus on the proposed integrating framework.

Canada↗

PubMedDate not supplied

Health promotion dissemination and systems thinking: towards an integrative model.

OBJECTIVE: To help close the gap between health promotion research and practice by using systems thinking. METHODS: We reviewed 3 national US tobacco control initiatives and a project (ISIS) that had introduced systems thinking to tobacco control, speculating on ways in which systems thinking may add value to health promotion dissemination and implementation in general. RESULTS: The diversity of disciplines involved in tobacco control have created disconnection in the field; systems thinking is necessary to increase the impact of strategies. CONCLUSION: Systems thinking has potential to improve synthesis, translation, and dissemination of research findings in other health promotion initiatives.

Adolescent↗