ReviewTobacco prevention & cessation2023
The effectiveness of Allen Carr's method for smoking cessation: A systematic review.
Review in Tobacco prevention & cessation, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAllen Carr's (AC) method is a pharmacotherapy-free approach to quit smoking that is delivered through seminars, online courses, or in the form of a book. It has gained popularity, but its effectiveness remains controversial due to a lack of scientific evidence. This systematic review aims to provide an updated overview of the current evidence on the effectiveness of the AC method.
methodsWe conducted a systematic literature review of all epidemiological studies evaluating the effectiveness of the AC method for smoking cessation, published in PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase up to March 2023.
resultsAmong 34 original studies identified through the literature search, six met the inclusion criteria. These studies were published between 2006 and 2020, with sample sizes ranging from 92 to 620 participants. Of the six studies, two did not have a comparison group while four, including two randomized control led trials (RCT), had a comparison group. The included studies showed cessation rates for people who attended the seminars from 19% to 51%. An observational study found an odds ratio (OR) of abstinence for those attending AC single-session seminars of 6.52 (95% confidence interval, CI: 3.10-13.72) compared with controls with no treatment. One RCT found higher quit rates for AC single-session seminars compared with the online Irish National service (OR=2.26; 95% CI: 1.22-4.21). Another RCT reported no significant difference between AC single-session seminars and a specialist stopsmoking service. One single study on patients with head and neck disorders analyzed the effectiveness of reading the AC book, showing no significant results.
conclusionsThe AC seminar may be an effective intervention for smoking cessation. This approach deserves further RCTs with large sample sizes to strengthen the evidence. Scant data are available on the effectiveness of reading the AC book.
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.