{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.03754266211604096, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011376564277588168, 'mean_word_length': 5.984126984126984, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A three-year follow-up of hypnosis and restricted environmental stimulation therapy for smoking.

Abstract Clinical follow-up data were obtained from 307 clients. Clinicians' experience level, contact time, and procedural thoroughness varied in 6 interventions for smoking cessation. An additional intervention combined hypnosis with restricted environmental stimulation therapy (REST). The major results suggest positive treatment outcomes to be related to greater hypnotizability, absorption, hypnotist experience level, procedural thoroughness, and client-therapist contact time. The least effective intervention (4% abstinence at 4-month follow-up) involved intern trainees using a short, single-session approach. The most effective procedure (47% abstinence at 19-month follow-up) involved the combination of hypnosis and REST. Data interpretation limitations are discussed.