Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28869775›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017

Internet-based interventions for smoking cessation.

Gemma M J Taylor, Michael N Dalili, Monika Semwal, Marta Civljak, Aziz Sheikh, Josip Car

Registry-linked trialAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
184citing papers in PubMed, 31 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.

NCT05318651 nacompletednot on this mapstarted 2022, after this paper: background citation

Determinants of Use of Mobile Apps for Smoking Cessation

TypeinterventionalSponsorParis Nanterre UniversityRan2022 to 2022Enrolled255ConditionsSmoking Cessation, Technology Acceptance Model, CBT, EngagementArmsKwit SAS - smoking cessation app
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

184 citing papers in PubMed, 31 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Recommendations on interventions for tobacco smoking cessation in adults in Canada.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025
    Guideline
  3. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2025
    Guideline
  4. Interventions for smokeless tobacco use cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Interventions for tobacco use cessation in people living with HIV.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. 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 · 2023
    Pooled it
  11. Interventions for waterpipe smoking cessation.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  12. 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 · 2023
    Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Pooled it
  15. eHealth Interventions to Treat Substance Use in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2021
    Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Pooled it
  20. Pooled it

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Gemma M J TaylorMRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, UK Centre for Tobacco and Alcohol Studies, School of Experimental Psychology, University of Bristol, 12a Priory Road, Bristol, UK, BS8 1TU.
Michael N Dalili
Monika Semwal
Marta Civljak
Aziz Sheikh
Josip Car

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

InternetAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMaleProgram EvaluationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSmoking CessationTherapy, Computer-AssistedTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID28869775
PMCPMC6703145

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.