SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017
Internet-based interventions for smoking cessation.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05318651 (Determinants of Use of Mobile Apps for Smoking Cessation), which is not on this map. Cited by 184 papers, 31 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Determinants of Use of Mobile Apps for Smoking Cessation
Who cites it
184 citing papers in PubMed, 31 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Interactive Conversational Agents to Improve Dietary Behaviors for Health Promotion: Mixed Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Pooled it
- Recommendations on interventions for tobacco smoking cessation in adults in Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025Guideline
- Guideline
- Interventions for smokeless tobacco use cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Differences in the effectiveness of individual-level smoking cessation interventions by socioeconomic status.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- Does socioeconomic position moderate the associations between the content and delivery features of digital behaviour change interventions for smoking cessation and intervention effectiveness? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Health psychology review · 2024Pooled it
- Interventions for tobacco use cessation in people living with HIV.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Estimating the true effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions under variable comparator conditions: A systematic review and meta-regression.Addiction (Abingdon, England) · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness of eHealth Smoking Cessation Interventions: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness and Acceptability of Conversational Agents for Smoking Cessation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023Pooled it
- Interventions for waterpipe smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023Pooled it
- Proactive Referral to Behavioral Smoking Cessation Programs by Healthcare Staff: A Systematic Review.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023Pooled it
- Addressing Cognitive Function and Psychological Well-Being in Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Review on the Use of Technology-Based Interventions.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Pooled it
- The Long-Term Effectiveness of Internet-Based Interventions on Multiple Health Risk Behaviors: Systematic Review and Robust Variance Estimation Meta-analysis.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- eHealth Interventions to Treat Substance Use in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021Pooled it
- A systematic review of trial-based economic evaluations of internet- and mobile-based interventions for substance use disorders.European journal of public health · 2021Pooled it
- Effectiveness of Digital Interventions for Reducing Behavioral Risks of Cardiovascular Disease in Nonclinical Adult Populations: Systematic Review of Reviews.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021Pooled it
- Global burden of active smoking among people living with HIV on antiretroviral therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Infectious diseases of poverty · 2021Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Behavioural interventions for smoking cessation: an overview and network meta-analysis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
124 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTobacco use is estimated to kill 7 million people a year. Nicotine is highly addictive, but surveys indicate that almost 70% of US and UK smokers would like to stop smoking. Although many smokers attempt to give up on their own, advice from a health professional increases the chances of quitting. As of 2016 there were 3.5 billion Internet users worldwide, making the Internet a potential platform to help people quit smoking.
objectivesTo determine the effectiveness of Internet-based interventions for smoking cessation, whether intervention effectiveness is altered by tailoring or interactive features, and if there is a difference in effectiveness between adolescents, young adults, and adults. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, which included searches of MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO (through OVID). There were no restrictions placed on language, publication status or publication date. The most recent search was conducted in August 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Participants were people who smoked, with no exclusions based on age, gender, ethnicity, language or health status. Any type of Internet intervention was eligible. The comparison condition could be a no-intervention control, a different Internet intervention, or a non-Internet intervention. To be included, studies must have measured smoking cessation at four weeks or longer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed and extracted data. We extracted and, where appropriate, pooled smoking cessation outcomes of six-month follow-up or more, reporting short-term outcomes narratively where longer-term outcomes were not available. We reported study effects as a risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI).We grouped studies according to whether they (1) compared an Internet intervention with a non-active control arm (e.g. printed self-help guides), (2) compared an Internet intervention with an active control arm (e.g. face-to-face counselling), (3) evaluated the addition of behavioural support to an Internet programme, or (4) compared one Internet intervention with another. Where appropriate we grouped studies by age. MAIN
resultsWe identified 67 RCTs, including data from over 110,000 participants. We pooled data from 35,969 participants.There were only four RCTs conducted in adolescence or young adults that were eligible for meta-analysis.Results for trials in adults: Eight trials compared a tailored and interactive Internet intervention to a non-active control. Pooled results demonstrated an effect in favour of the intervention (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.30, n = 6786). However, statistical heterogeneity was high (I AUTHORS'
conclusionsThe evidence from trials in adults suggests that interactive and tailored Internet-based interventions with or without additional behavioural support are moderately more effective than non-active controls at six months or longer, but there was no evidence that these interventions were better than other active smoking treatments. However some of the studies were at high risk of bias, and there was evidence of substantial statistical heterogeneity. Treatment effectiveness in younger people is unknown.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.