Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18048627›Full record

SynthesisTobacco control2007

A systematic review of interventions for smokers who contact quitlines.

Lindsay F Stead, Rafael Perera, Tim Lancaster

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Tobacco control, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

86 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Telephone counselling for smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Impact of a Smoking Cessation Quitline in Vietnam: Evidence Base and Future Directions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2019
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. A preliminary randomized controlled trial of a behavioral exercise intervention for smoking cessation.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2014
    Trial
  19. Trial
  20. Trial

26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Lindsay F SteadCochrane Tobacco Addiction Group, Department of Primary Health Care, Oxford University, Rosemary Rue Building, Old Road Campus, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LF, UK. lindsay.stead@dphpc.ox.ac.uk
Rafael Perera
Tim Lancaster

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the effect of different types of adjunctive support to stop smoking for individuals contacting telephone "quitlines," including call-back counselling, different counselling techniques and provision of self help materials. DATA SOURCES: This review includes quitline studies identified as part of Cochrane reviews of telephone counselling and self help materials for smoking cessation. We updated the searches for this review. STUDY SELECTION: We included studies that were randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of any quitline or related service with follow-up of at least six months. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were extracted by one author and checked by a second. The cessation outcome was numbers quit at longest follow-up taking the strictest definition of abstinence available, and assuming participants lost to follow-up continued to smoke. DATA SYNTHESIS: We identified 14 relevant studies. Eight studies (18 500 participants) comparing multiple call-backs to a single contact increased quitting in the intervention group (Mantel-Haenszel fixed effect odds ratio 1.41, 95% confidence interval 1.27 to 1.57). Two unpublished studies without sufficient data to include in the meta-analysis also reported positive effects. Three call-back trials compared two schedules of multiple calls. Two found a significant dose-response effect and one did not detect a difference. We did not find consistent differences in comparisons between counselling approaches (two trials) or between different types of self help materials supplied following quitline contact (three trials).

conclusionsMultiple call-back counselling improves long term cessation for smokers who contact quitline services. Offering more calls may improve success rates. We failed to detect an effect of the type of counselling or the type of self help materials supplied as adjuncts to quitline counselling.

Indexed as

HotlinesSmoking PreventionCounselingHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelf CareSmoking Cessation

Identifiers

PMID18048627
PMCPMC2598525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.