We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) for tobacco cessation is an evidence-based, yet underutilized intervention. More research is needed to understand why some treatment-seekers are ‘no-shows’ for the initial visit.
Aim
Examine factors associated with participant no-shows among smokers scheduled for group CBT.
Methods
Tobacco smokers (N = 115) were recruited from the community, screened, and if eligible, scheduled to begin group-based CBT plus nicotine replacement therapy. At the screening, participants reported their recruitment source, demographics, smoking history, and contact information. We computed the distance to the study site using the address provided. Regression analyses tested predictors of participant no-shows for the initial visit.
Results
Eligible participants were mostly recruited via flyers (56%), female (58%), African American (61%), middle-aged (Mage = 49 years), averaged 16 cigarettes per day, and resided 8 miles away from the study site. The overall initial visit no-show rate was 56%. Bivariate analyses indicated that respondents who were recruited online, younger, and lived further away from the site were more likely to be no-shows. Younger age significantly predicted failure to attend in the multivariable model.
Conclusions
Findings highlight potential barriers to participation in a group-based intervention, and have implications for pre-intervention engagement strategies and modifications that may increase reach and uptake.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.