Cochrane · systematic review · CD001118
Print‐based self‐help interventions for smoking cessation
Livingstone‐Banks, J, Ordóñez‐Mena, JM, Hartmann‐Boyce, J · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2019 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
2
current version
GRADE rated
2
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 2 · 100%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Current version onlyPrint‐based self‐help compared to no materials for smoking cessation
Population: people who smoke; not selected for interest in quitting smoking
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Abstinence ‐ non‐tailored self‐help Print‐based self‐help vs no materials | RR 1.19 [1.03, 1.37] | 11 studies · 13241 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, indirectness |
Abstinence ‐ individually tailored self‐help Print‐based self‐help vs no materials | RR 1.34 [1.19, 1.51] | 10 studies · 14359 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Print‐based self help compared to no materials for smoking cessation
Population: People who smoke, not selected for interest in quitting smoking
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Abstinence ‐ non‐tailored self‐help Print‐based self help vs no materials | RR 1.19 [1.04, 1.37] | 11 studies · 13241 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Abstinence ‐ individually tailored self‐help Print‐based self help vs no materials | RR 1.35 [1.19, 1.53] | 9 studies · 13437 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |