English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Confirming abstinence during smoking cessation clinical trials is critical for determining treatment effectiveness. Several biological methods exist for verifying abstinence (e.g., exhaled carbon monoxide [CO], cotinine), and while cotinine provides a longer window of detection, it is not easily used in trials involving nicotine replacement therapy. The Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco's Subcommittee on Biochemical Verification cite 8-10 parts per million (ppm) for CO as a viable cutoff to determine abstinence; however, recent literature suggests this cutoff is likely too high and may overestimate the efficacy of treatment.

How Low Should You Go? Determining the Optimal Cutoff for Exhaled Carbon Monoxide to Confirm Smoking Abstinence When Using Cotinine as Reference