SynthesisSystematic reviews2022
The effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions for socio-economically disadvantaged women: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 3 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Facilitators and barriers to smoking cessation support among professionals in social and community service settings: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.Health education research · 2025Pooled it
- Contextual factors in systematic reviews: understanding public health interventions in low socioeconomic status and disadvantaged populations.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2025Pooled it
- Conducting co-creation for public health in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review and key informant perspectives on implementation barriers and facilitators.Globalization and health · 2024Pooled it
- Tailoring a national smoking cessation support programme in co-creation with (expectant) parents in vulnerable situations.BMC public health · 2026Article
- Effect of population based tobacco cessation treatment in India.Bioinformation · 2026Article
- Detecting imminent smoking lapse risk: Prospective lapse risk algorithm versus participant retrospective self-report.Drug and alcohol dependence · 2025Article
- Smoking cessation message testing to inform app-based interventions for young adults - an online experiment.BMC public health · 2025Article
- Contribution of smoking to the global burden of bladder cancer from 1990 to 2021 and projections to 2046.Tobacco induced diseases · 2025Article
- A Review of Smoking Cessation Interventions: Efficacy, Strategies for Implementation, and Future Directions.Cureus · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThis systematic review and meta-analysis assessed the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions among women smokers in low socio-economic status (SES) groups or women living in disadvantaged areas who are historically underserved by smoking cessation services.
methodsA systematic literature search was conducted using MEDLINE (OVID), EMBASE, Cochrane, CINAHL, PsychINFO and Web of Science databases. Eligibility criteria included randomised controlled trials of any smoking cessation intervention among women in low SES groups or living in socio-economically disadvantaged areas. A random effects meta-analysis assessed effectiveness of interventions on smoking cessation. Risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The GRADE approach established certainty of evidence.
resultsA total of 396 studies were screened for eligibility and 11 (6153 female participants) were included. Seven studies targeted women-only. 5/11 tested a form of face-to-face support. A pooled effect size was estimated in 10/11 studies. At end of treatment, two-thirds more low SES women who received a smoking cessation intervention were more likely to stop smoking than women in control groups (risk ratio (RR) 1.68, 95% CI 1.36-2.08, I
conclusionsBehavioural and behavioural + pharmacotherapy interventions for smoking cessation targeting women in low SES groups or women living in areas of disadvantage were effective in the short term. However, longer follow-up periods indicated reduced effectiveness. Future studies to explore ways to prevent smoking relapse in this population are needed. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42019130160.
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.