Cochrane · systematic review · CD003289
Tobacco cessation interventions for young people
Fanshawe, TR, Halliwell, W, Lindson, N, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2017 · 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
13
current version
GRADE rated
11
No studies
2
Included studies
NR
No studies 2 · 15.4%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 7 · 53.8%Low 4 · 30.8%Moderate 0 · 0%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
Show all 2 versionsBehavioural interventions compared to minimal control for smoking cessation in young people
Population: young people
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Comparisons and outcomes1 Behavioural interventions vs minimal control | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Individual counselling (in‐person) vs control Smoking cessation Behavioural interventions vs minimal control | RR 1.07 [0.83, 1.39] | 7 studies · 2088 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Group counselling vs control Smoking cessation Behavioural interventions vs minimal control | RR 1.35 [1.03, 1.77] | 9 studies · 1910 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Computer‐based interventions vs control Smoking cessation Behavioural interventions vs minimal control | RR 0.79 [0.5, 1.24] | 3 studies · 340 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Text messaging‐based interventions vs control Smoking cessation Behavioural interventions vs minimal control | RR 1.18 [0.9, 1.56] | 3 studies · 2985 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Interventions with multiple delivery methods vs control Smoking cessation Behavioural interventions vs minimal control | RR 1.26 [0.95, 1.66] | 8 studies · 2755 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Pharmacological interventions compared to placebo for smoking cessation in young people
Population: young people
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Comparisons and outcomes Pharmacological interventions vs placebo | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
NRT vs placebo Smoking cessation Pharmacological interventions vs placebo | RR 1.11 [0.48, 2.58] | 2 studies · 385 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
NRT vs placebo Adverse events Pharmacological interventions vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 385 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Bupropion vs placebo Smoking cessation Pharmacological interventions vs placebo | RR 1.49 [0.55, 4.02] | 1 study · 207 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Bupropion vs placebo Adverse events Pharmacological interventions vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 207 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Nicotine patch + bupropion vs nicotine patch + placebo Smoking cessation Pharmacological interventions vs placebo | RR 1.05 [0.41, 2.69] | 1 study · 211 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Nicotine patch + bupropion vs nicotine patch + placebo Adverse events Pharmacological interventions vs placebo | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 211 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |