***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Summary Two procedures design ed to modify smoking behavior were compared . Each involved the self-administration of an aversive taste substance contingent upon and concomitant with the smoking response . For one of the treatment groups ,  Ss  received supervision and support through periodic group meetings while  Ss  in the other  treatment group  did not receive this group contact . Two control groups , one consisting of  Ss who applied for but did not receive treatment and another of Ss who did not seek treatment  , were used to evaluate extra-therapeutic and motivational factors . The smoking behavior of these groups was evaluated at the termination of treatment and at one and six-month follow-ups . At the termination of the clinic the group-aversive , individual-aversive and the apply control Ss all displayed a significant reduction in their smoking behavior , with the group-aversive Ss showing a reliably greater reduction than the latter two groups . At the one and six-month follow-ups the two treatment and the apply control groups , which still showed a significant reduction in smoking , were no longer reliably different from each other . In contrast , Ss who lid not apply for treatment showed no changes in their smoking behavior during the study . The importance of the S motivation factor in self-control of smoking was discussed Abstract Three procedures design ed to modify  smoking behavior were compared ; each being administered in group situations by trained non-professional leaders . One procedure provided information regarding the harmful effects of smoking ; a second involved an aversive conditioning experience ; and a third , a means for learning self-control behavior . A non-treated control group was included to assess whether extra-therapeutic variables were operating . All three treatment procedures led to significant reduction in smoking at a one week followup . Despite remission on the part of all treatment groups there was still significant reduction in their smoking behavior after a three month followup . Surprisingly , however , the control group also showed reduction in smoking and was not reliably different from the treatment groups at the three month followup The present investigation assessed the effectiveness of nicotine fading as a non-aversive alternative to oversmoking . Subjects ( 66 women and 64 men ) were r and omly assigned to  oversmoking , nicotine fading , nicotine fading/smokeholding , and a nonmaintenance control . Results failed to indicate the expected superiority of nicotine fading/maintenance over the control condition . Instead , the addition of smokeholding appeared to produce a significant incremental effect over nicotine fading alone . Unfortunately , 12-month follow-up revealed considerable relapse across conditions and no significant treatment effects . Even so , absolute outcome for nicotine fading/smokeholding was encouraging . This procedure is both safe and apparently very acceptable to subjects . If the current results can be replicated , a clinical ly effective technique will have been established with applicability in both clinic and self-help setting The present study developed and tested a response prevention treatment for cigarette smoking .  Response prevention is based on the conditioning theory of addictions . Thirty-nine smokers were divided into two groups , one receiving response prevention and the other a rapid smoking comparison treatment . No significant differences were found between the two treatments in terms of their effectiveness in achieving abstinence or smoking reduction . The abstinence rate at the 6-month follow-up for response prevention was 7 % and for rapid smoking was 23 % Abstract The role of aversive conditioning in rapid smoking was examined by r and omly assigning smokers to one of three  aversive treatments  design ed to induce three distinct levels of central malaise . These treatments ,  full-scale rapid smoking ( FS ; n = 22 ) , truncated rapid smoking ( TC : n = 20 ) and  rapid puffing  ( RP ; n = 20 ) were combined with a full-scale counseling package . A fourth treatment ,  full-scale rapid smoking with reduced counseling ( RC ; n = 20 ) , was included to evaluate the contribution of coping response training to rapid-smoking efficacy . Among post-treatment measures of aversion , only heart rate ( HR ) response to cigarettes discriminated groups , with FS Ss exhibiting an apparent conditioned cardiac acceleration to cigarettes . Six-month follow-up data revealed that both the type of counseling and level of aversion had an impact on cigarette abstinence . At 6-months post-treatment , the FS group produced the best outcome , while the TC group and the RC group had the worst outcomes . The RP group was intermediate to these groups . Regression analysis showed that across all groups , confidence ratings of remaining abstinent were most predictive of outcome whereas within the two full-scale rapid-smoking treatments , post-treatment HR response to cigarettes was most predictive of latency to relapse . The results were discussed with respect to the contributions of aversion conditioning and full counseling to the success of aversive treatment packages for smoking cessation Smokers ( N = 126 ) were r and omly assigned to 6-session smoking cessation treatments consisting of 1 of 2 counseling strategies ( skills training or support ) and 1 of 2 nicotine exposure strategies ( nicotine gum or rapid smoking ) . Counseling and nicotine strategies were completely crossed ; all four combinations result ed in equivalent 1-year abstinence rates .  Skills training produced higher initial cessation and more coping responses posttreatment than did support . Rapid smoking , but not nicotine gum , produced tachycardia to the taste of cigarettes posttreatment , consistent with cigarette aversion . The treatments were differentially effective among sub population s of smokers : Subjects high in pretreatment negative affect responded best to support counseling ;  those low in pretreatment negative affect responded best to skills training .  Self-reports of pretreatment craving predicted response to the nicotine exposure treatments Abstract Forty-nine dependent smokers were assigned to one of three treatment conditions : rapid smoking , cue exposure or simple support . There were no differences between treatments in the proportion who stopped smoking or the average reduction in smoking at the end of treatment or at 1 yr follow-up . The overall proportion who stopped was 22 % at the end of treatment and 14 % at 1 yr follow-up . Time of the first cigarette of the day ( before tea or coffee ) and percentage reduction in consumption whilst trying to cut down unaided , predicted abstinence at 1 yr follow-up . These results do not support cl aims made for the effectiveness of rapid smoking Two studies tested the utility of self-control procedures and covert sensitization as alternatives to rapid smoking in  smoking cessation . Subjects were at least 21 years old and had smoked at least one pack per day for at least 5 years .  Relaxation training and discussion of goals were given in three meetings per week for 2 weeks prior to subject-chosen quit date s. A total of 10 sessions was held during the 90 days following cessation . In Study I , both groups received self-control strategies . One group also received covert sensitization . At 3-month follow-up , 33 % of those without and 27 % of those with covert sensitization were abstinent . At 6-month follow-up these percentages were 33 and 13 , respectively . Covert sensitization apparently added nothing to the effects of the self-control package . In Study II , one group received the same combination of self-control manual and the basic package as in Study I. A second group received the basic package with cue extinction procedures design ed to extinguish associations between desires for cigarettes and cues paired with previous smoking . A third group received a combination of both sets of procedures . At 3-month follow-up , 71 and 60 % , respectively , of the first two groups were abstinent , while only 31 % of the combination group was abstinent . At 6-month follow-up , these percentages were 29 , 27 , and 8 , respectively . The low abstinence rate for the combination group likely reflects problems associated with presenting too much material in the 2 weeks prior to cessation The present investigation initiated a dismantling strategy in which subjects were assigned to treatment stages ( preparation , aversion , maintenance ) or to combinations of stages in a factorial design . It was hypothesized that multistage conditions would be superior to single stage conditions and that maintenance would retard relapse .  Forty men and 33 women were r and omly assigned to one of seven conditions . Results supported both hypotheses although significant effects were no longer evident at 12-month follow-up . Considerable relapse occurred in all conditions . Specific treatment components appeared to be of limited importance as indicated by generally very similar results for  preparation and aversion . Booster sessions appeared to be ineffective . Interpretation of the findings is limited , however , by a relatively small subject enrollment in each condition . It was concluded that attempts to isolate extremely precise treatment elements are unlikely to be successful . Suggestions for further research included adoption of more structured maintenance strategies emphasizing coping skills and a more systematic focus upon potentially important process variables , notably group cohesiveness Abstract The study examined the effectiveness of the rapid-smoking technique in terms of two measures of outcome —post-treatment abstinence rate and reduction in smoking achieved by non-abstinent subjects . A total of 75 volunteers ( 40 men and 35 women ) participated in treatment and were r and omly allocated to one of four conditions — rapid-smoking alone ; rapid-smoking and relaxation training ; rapid-smoking , relaxation and contingency contracting ; or contingent rapid-smoking . No significant differences between treatment conditions were obtained . For the total sample , abstinence was achieved by 64 % of the subjects immediately post-treatment but the probability of remaining abstinent 12 months later was only 0.33 . Immediately post-treatment the non-abstinent subjects reduced their rate of cigarette consumption to 34.2 % ( SD = 29.3 ) of baseline smoking but by 12 months average consumption had increased to 82.4 % ( SD = 28.3 ) of baseline . It is concluded that rapid-smoking gives rise to substantial short-term changes in smoking behaviour but these effects are not sustained We tested a multicomponent behavioural package to stop smoking that contained nicotine fading and smokeholding techniques . 73 smokers were r and omly assigned to one of five treatment programmes : ( 1 ) nicotine fading and cigarette fading , ( 2 ) nicotine fading and concurrent smokeholding , ( 3 ) nicotine fading and subsequent smokeholding , ( 4 ) a nonintensive smokeholding programme , and ( 5 ) an intensive smokeholding programme ( daily sessions ) . Common components of the programmes were self-monitoring , information on smoking , stimulus control , CO feedback , and strategies to avoid withdrawal symptoms . Each treatment was carried out during a total of 10 sessions over 4 weeks ( Treatments 1 - 4 ) or 2 weeks ( Treatment 5 ) . End-of-treatment quit rates ranged from 85 % to 91 % . At 12-mo . follow-up , the most effective package proved to have been  nicotine fading and cigarette fading  , with an abstinence rate of 57 % as against 25 to 37 % for the other treatments Abstract Two saturation procedures of different lengths were administered to S s who desired to quit smoking . S s chain-smoked for either 20 hr ( group E 1 ) or 10 hr ( E 2 ) . Total abstinence was the main dependent measure . Both groups experienced relatively equal success on a short-term basis . Long-term abstinence was noted for group E 1 only . Sixty per cent of the E 1 S s were not smoking 4 months after treatment Abstract The effectiveness of strong aversion joined with various group training procedures was compared with strong aversion and mild aversion treatments in the reduction of smoking behavior .  Fifty-two male and female smokers were assigned to strong aversion plus self-control group , strong aversion plus temptation-control group , strong aversion and mild aversion groups . In addition , the effect of vomiting during the aversive training was related to follow-up cigarette consumption rates . In general , these data suggest that strong aversion alone is as effective as a combination of strong aversion plus self-control training . Vomiting during treatment appears to be related to lowered cigarette consumption Abstract This study evaluated the effects of a comprehensive program for the treatment of cigarette addiction . Forty percent abstinence levels verified by expired air carbon monoxide tests were achieved in a 6–9 month follow-up period . A partial component analysis revealed that the comprehensive program was not significantly more powerful than a principle component — the focused smoking technique . Revisions in the program are suggested Abstract Seventy dependent heavy smokers ( 32 cigarettes per day ) were r and omly assigned to one of five treatment and control procedures : ( 1 ) electric aversion therapy , involving ten 20-trial sessions of shocks contiguous with the smoking act . ( 2 ) simulated electric aversion . with non-contiguous shocks , ( 3 ) non-shock smoking sessions , to control for stimulus satiation and negative practice effects . ( 4 ) simple support and attention from therapist , ( 5 ) no-treatment . Before treatment , simple ‘ self-monitoring ’ and ‘ self-control ’ reduced cigarette consumption by an average of 12 % ( Abstract An aversive smoking treatment , either alone or followed by 24 hr of restricted environmental stimulation therapy ( REST , lying on a bed in a dark , silent chamber with occasional smoking-related messages presented over an intercom ) , was administered to 74 smokers . The subtractive expectancy placebo technique , where an active treatment is described as inert , was used to evaluate the role of the expectancy placebo component . The combined treatments were more effective than aversive conditioning alone , but less so than REST by itself . Expectancy contributed substantially to the success of the aversion treatment through the 6-month follow-up , and less so to the early success of REST . These components faded by the end of 12 months . The implication s for design ing follow-up periods for studies in this area are obvious . The results also supported hypotheses that S s who undergo REST are less likely to relapse once they have quit smoking , and that other REST S s who do not quit show success in controlled ( reduced ) smoking . For the first time , REST did not potenti 
    Output:
    
REVIEW ERS ' CONCLUSIONS The existing studies provide insufficient evidence to determine the efficacy of rapid smoking , or whether there is a dose-response to aversive stimulation .
Milder versions of aversive smoking seem to lack specific efficacy .