Search

Background: Big data research requires public support. It has been argued that this can be achieved by public involvement and engagement to ensure that public views are at the centre of research projects. Researchers should aim to include diverse communities, including seldom‐heard voices, to ensure that a range of voices are heard and that research is meaningful to them. Objective: We explored how researchers involve and engage seldom‐heard communities around big data research. Methods: This is a qualitative study. Researchers who had experience of involving or engaging seldom‐heard communities in big data research were recruited. They were based in England (n = 5), Scotland (n = 4), Belgium (n = 2) and Canada (n = 1). Twelve semistructured interviews were conducted on Zoom. All interviews were audio‐recorded and transcribed, and we used reflexive thematic analysis to analyse participants' experiences. Results: The analysis highlighted the complexity of involving and engaging seldom‐heard communities around big data research. Four themes were developed to represent participants' experiences: (1) abstraction and complexity of big data, (2) one size does not fit all, (3) working in partnership and (4) empowering the public contribution. Conclusion: The study offers researchers a better understanding of how to involve and engage seldom‐heard communities in a meaningful way around big data research. There is no one right approach, with involvement and engagement activities required to be project‐specific and dependent on the public contributors, researchers' needs, resources and time available. Patient and Public Involvement: Two public contributors are authors of the paper and they were involved in the study design, analysis and writing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: This integrative review aimed to understand the impact of nursing on the health outcomes of people with opioid use disorder (OUD). Methods: Whittemore and Knafl's (2005) integrative review methodology guided the review process. The authors searched PubMed, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and OVID databases for peer‐reviewed, English language articles describing nursing care for people receiving medications for OUD. The literature search followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Results: A total of 773 articles were identified through the database searches after duplicates were removed; 15 articles met inclusion criteria and were included in the final review from the United States, Canada, Ireland, England, and the Netherlands. Two themes emerged: (1) The effect of nurse‐led care on patient outcomes and (2) Nursing roles and the environment of care. Studies emphasized the aspects of nursing care that promote patient‐centeredness and patient satisfaction. Conclusions: The importance of the registered nurse in providing quality care for people receiving medications for OUD is clear from the literature reviewed. The studies in the review highlighted important aspects of the registered nurses' role in affecting outcomes for people receiving medications for OUD including communication and care coordination. Clinical relevance: This review highlights the need for role delineation and further development of nurse‐sensitive indicators in the OUD treatment setting. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Aims: Most population studies that evaluate the relationship between nicotine vaping and cigarette cessation focus on limited segments of the smoker population. We evaluated vaping uptake and smoking cessation considering differences in smokers' plans to quit. Design: Longitudinal International Tobacco Control (ITC) Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys were conducted in 2016, 2018 and 2020. Setting: This study was conducted in the United States, Canada, England and Australia. Participants: Participants of this study were adult daily cigarette smokers who had not vaped in the past 6 months at baseline and had participated in two or more consecutive waves of the ITC Four Country Smoking and Vaping Surveys (n = 2815). Measurements Plans to quit cigarette smoking was assessed at baseline (within 6 months, beyond 6 months, not planning to quit) and at follow‐up (within 6 months vs not within 6 months), cigarette smoking cessation was assessed at follow‐up (smoking less than monthly [including complete cessation] vs daily/weekly/monthly smoking) and inter‐wave vaping uptake was assesed between baseline and follow‐up (none, only non‐daily vaping and any daily vaping). Generalized estimating equations were used to evaluate whether inter‐wave vaping uptake was associated with smoking cessation at follow‐up and with planning to quit at follow‐up, each stratified by plans to quit smoking at baseline. Findings Overall, 12.7% of smokers quit smoking. Smokers not initially planning to quit within 6 months experienced higher odds of smoking cessation when they took up daily vaping (32.4%) versus no vaping (6.8%; adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 8.58; 95% CI, 5.06–14.54). Among smokers planning to quit, smoking cessation rates were similar between those who did and did not take up daily vaping (25.1% vs 16.8%; AOR, 1.91; 95% CI, 0.91–4.00), although we could not account for potential use of cessation aids. Daily vaping uptake was associated with planning to quit smoking at follow‐up among those initially not planning to quit (AOR,6.32; 95% CI, 4.17–9.59). Conclusions: Uptake of nicotine vaping appears to be strongly associated with cigarette smoking cessation among smokers with no initial plans to quit smoking. Excluding smokers not planning to quit from studies on vaping and smoking cessation may underestimate potential benefit of daily vaping for daily smokers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: To examine whether polyuse of cigarettes and other smoked products (polysmoking) is predictive of quit attempts and quit success. Design: A prospective multi‐country cohort design. Setting: Australia, Canada, England and the United States. Participants: A total of 3983 adult daily cigarette smokers were surveyed in 2016 (wave 1 of data collection) and were re‐contacted in 2018 (wave 2) (i.e. waves 1–2 cohort) in the International Tobacco Control Four Country Smoking and Vaping (ITC 4CV) surveys; and 3736 smokers were surveyed in 2018 and re‐contacted in 2020 (wave 3) (i.e. waves 2–3 cohort). Measurements Participants were asked about their cigarette smoking and use of cigars, cigarillos, pipes and waterpipes. Outcomes were quit attempts between two survey waves and success, defined as having quit smoking all the combustible tobacco at the subsequent survey for 1 month or more. Findings Levels of polysmoking were 12.7% in the waves 1–2 cohort and 10.5% for the waves 2–3 cohort. Compared with cigarette‐only smokers, polysmokers were more likely to attempt to quit between waves 1 and 2 [54.9 versus 42.7%, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.08–1.74, P < 0.01], but not between waves 2 and 3 (43.8 versus 40.1%, aOR = 0.94, 95% CI = 0.72–1.22). Polysmoking predicted reduced likelihood of success in both cohorts among attempters and the overall samples. Between waves 2 and 3 there were significantly more transitions to non‐daily smoking among the polysmokers (12.4 versus 5.3%, χ2 = 40.4, P < 0.001). Conclusions: There is a consistent association between polysmoking (use of cigarettes together with other smoked products) and reduced quit success for combustible tobacco, but it is probably due to increased likelihood of transitioning to non‐daily use rather than complete cessation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]