Skip to main content

Table 5 Opinion about the importance, effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions by stakeholder category (scale responses: 1 = strongly disagree; 7 = strongly agree)

From: Similarities and differences between stakeholders’ opinions on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) information across five European countries: results from the EQUIPT survey

  Decision-maker Purchaser of services/pharma products Professional service provider Evidence generator Advocate of health promotion Total Kruskal–Wallis test
Statements n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) n Mean (SD) P value
The smoking epidemic is not severe in my country 29 1.76 (1.22) 7 2.00 (0.58) 18 1.78 (1.44) 25 2.04 (1.40) 14 1.71 (1.14) 93 1.85 (1.25) 0.42
Most smoking cessation interventions are effective 29 3.72 (1.67) 7 3.57 (1.27) 18 4.17 (1.58) 25 3.56 (1.69) 14 3.43 (1.83) 93 3.71 (1.64) 0.72
Most smoking cessation interventions are cost-effective 27 4.26 (1.95) 6 3.83 (1.47) 18 4.39 (2.06) 24 3.71 (2.14) 14 4.00 (1.71) 89 4.07 (1.94) 0.80
It is important to use smoking cessation interventions because smoking kills a lot of people 29 6.59 (0.83) 7 6.14 (0.90) 18 6.50 (1.34) 25 6.60 (0.76) 14 6.50 (0.76) 93 6.53 (0.92) 0.42
It is important to use smoking cessation interventions because smoking costs a lot for society 29 6.62 (0.78) 7 5.57 (1.27) 18 6.28 (1.27) 25 6.28 (0.98) 14 6.21 (1.19) 93 6.32 (1.06) 0.15
It is unacceptable that we use smoking cessation interventions without knowing their efficacy 28 5.75 (1.14) 7 6.71 (0.49) 18 5.33 (1.68) 25 6.24 (0.88) 13 5.62 (1.71) 91 5.86 (1.30) 0.13
It is unacceptable that we use smoking cessation interventions without knowing their cost-effectiveness 29 5.17 (1.61) 7 6.00 (0.58) 18 4.06 (1.83) 25 5.76 (1.48) 13 4.77 (1.24) 92 5.12 (1.62) 0.009
  1. SD, Standard deviation