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