Reliance on self-reporting underestimates pregnancy smoking rates in Scotland, with more than 2400 pregnant smokers estimated to be missed each year.
ABSTRACT Commentary on: ShiptonDTappinDMVadivelooT. Reliability of self reported smoking status by pregnant women for estimating smoking prevalence: a retrospective, cross sectional study. BMJ2009;339:b4347.
Full-textDOI: · Available from: Van Tong, Oct 29, 2014
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: This review presents an analysis of the literature on behavioral effects of developmental exposure to nicotine, as assessed in rodent models that mimic the consequences for human offspring of maternal cigarette smoking. Despite the frequency of reports of low birth weight, hyperactivity, cognitive deficits, and psychiatric problems, inconsistencies exist in both the clinical and experimental literature. Confounding socioeconomic and other demographic variables may account for discrepancies in clinical reports, and the choice of developmental exposure period and the method of nicotine administration may explain differences in experimental outcomes. Analysis of a number of variables (e.g., physical, behavioral, and cognitive) shows that fetal exposure to nicotine does not consistently cause growth retardation or decreased birth weight, nor reliably affect motor activity. But combined pre- and neonatal exposure is likely to result in delayed reflex development, global impairments in learning and memory, and an increased incidence of symptoms that model psychiatric illness. There is also support for increased self-administration of nicotine and other drugs of abuse in animals exposed developmentally to nicotine, as well as potent effects on offspring responses to drug challenges. Unlike reports in the clinical literature, sexually dimorphic effects were not evident in most animal models. Possible neuroanatomical and cholinergic mechanisms responsible for behavioral changes are briefly discussed. Statistical and design considerations are provided to increase the translational value of this research and, most importantly, enhance the replicability of reported findings.ILAR journal / National Research Council, Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources 01/2011; 52(3):251-294. DOI:10.1093/ilar.52.3.251 · 1.05 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: There is growing international interest in the use of financial incentives in smoking cessation, yet little research on public opinion of the scheme. This paper reports on the acceptability of incentives for reducing smoking in pregnant women and the perceived size of incentive that would encourage smoking cessation during pregnancy. A cross-sectional survey was conducted on a convenience sample of 213 women attending the antenatal clinic of a large public hospital in Australia. Participants completed a questionnaire on their views on the use of incentives with responses measured on a 5-point Likert scale. The majority of participants (60%) did not agree that paying pregnant smokers to quit is a good idea. Opinions regarding the likely effectiveness were mixed with 30% of respondents in agreement and 22% undecided. Most (62%) were not willing to pay smokers any amount to quit. Smokers were more likely to have more favorable views about incentives than nonsmokers (p < .0001) and considered payments of between $100 and >$1,000 acceptable as reward for quitting smoking. Acceptability for the use of financial incentives in reducing antenatal smoking is low among pregnant women. Future research should explore views of a wider audience and continue to gather stronger evidence of the efficacy of rewards for reducing smoking in pregnancy.Nicotine & Tobacco Research 06/2011; 13(11):1029-36. DOI:10.1093/ntr/ntr108 · 2.81 Impact Factor