Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30349201›Full record

ReviewPatient preference and adherence2018

Which eHealth interventions are most effective for smoking cessation? A systematic review.

Huyen Phuc Do, Bach Xuan Tran, Quyen Le Pham, Long Hoang Nguyen, Tung Thanh Tran, Carl A Latkin, Michael P Dunne, Philip Ra Baker

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Patient preference and adherence, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.5field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

37 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 75 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Digital Smoking Cessation With a Comprehensive Guideline-Based App-Results of a Nationwide, Multicentric, Parallel, Randomized Controlled Trial in Germany.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2024
    Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
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

8 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Huyen Phuc DoSchool of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, phuchuyen@gmail.com.
Bach Xuan TranDepartment of Health, Behaviours and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Quyen Le PhamDepartment of Internal Medicine, Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam.
Long Hoang NguyenDepartment of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Tung Thanh TranInstitute for Global Health Innovations, Duy Tan University, Danang, Vietnam, phuchuyen@gmail.com.
Carl A LatkinDepartment of Health, Behaviours and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Michael P DunneSchool of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, phuchuyen@gmail.com.
Philip Ra BakerSchool of Public Health and Social Work, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, phuchuyen@gmail.com.
Queensland University of Technology · AUJohns Hopkins University · USDuy Tan University · VNHanoi Medical University · VNKarolinska Institutet · SE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo synthesize evidence of the effects and potential effect modifiers of different electronic health (eHealth) interventions to help people quit smoking.

methodsFour databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, and The Cochrane Library) were searched in March 2017 using terms that included "smoking cessation", "eHealth/mHealth" and "electronic technology" to find relevant studies. Meta-analysis and meta-regression analyses were performed using Mantel-Haenszel test for fixed-effect risk ratio (RR) and restricted maximum-likelihood technique, respectively. Protocol Registration Number: CRD42017072560.

resultsThe review included 108 studies and 110,372 participants. Compared to nonactive control groups (eg, usual care), smoking cessation interventions using web-based and mobile health (mHealth) platform resulted in significantly greater smoking abstinence, RR 2.03 (95% CI 1.7-2.03), and RR 1.71 (95% CI 1.35-2.16), respectively. Similarly, smoking cessation trials using tailored text messages (RR 1.80, 95% CI 1.54-2.10) and web-based information and conjunctive nicotine replacement therapy (RR 1.29, 95% CI 1.17-1.43) may also increase cessation. In contrast, little or no benefit for smoking abstinence was found for computer-assisted interventions (RR 1.31, 95% CI 1.11-1.53). The magnitude of effect sizes from mHealth smoking cessation interventions was likely to be greater if the trial was conducted in the USA or Europe and when the intervention included individually tailored text messages. In contrast, high frequency of texts (daily) was less effective than weekly texts.

conclusionsThere was consistent evidence that web-based and mHealth smoking cessation interventions may increase abstinence moderately. Methodologic quality of trials and the intervention characteristics (tailored vs untailored) are critical effect modifiers among eHealth smoking cessation interventions, especially for web-based and text messaging trials. Future smoking cessation intervention should take advantages of web-based and mHealth engagement to improve prolonged abstinence.

Indexed as

computereffectivenesseHealthmHealthsmoking cessation interventionwebsite

Identifiers

PMID30349201
PMCPMC6188156
OpenAlexW2895410544

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.