Individual behavioural counselling for smoking cessation

Tim Lancaster; Lindsay F Stead

doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001292.pub2

Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Contenido relacionado

Ir a:

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados
Guías
Temas

Revisiones y protocolos relacionados

Topics

Temas

Figure 1

Methodological quality summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Figure 2

Forest plot of comparison: 1 Individual counselling compared to minimal contact control, outcome: 1.1 Smoking cessation at longest follow‐up.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Individual counselling compared to minimal contact control, Outcome 1 Smoking cessation at longest follow‐up.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.1

Comparison 2 More intensive versus less intensive counselling, Outcome 1 Smoking cessation at longest follow‐up.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 2.2

Comparison 2 More intensive versus less intensive counselling, Outcome 2 Sensitivity analyses for Alterman 2001 in intensive versus brief counselling comparison.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Analysis 3.1

Comparison 3 Comparisons between counselling approaches of similar intensity, Outcome 1 Smoking cessation at longest follow‐up.

Ir a la figura de la revisiónAbrir en una pestaña nueva

Comparison 1. Individual counselling compared to minimal contact control

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Smoking cessation at longest follow‐up Show forest plot	22	9587	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.39 [1.24, 1.57]

1.1 Counselling versus control (no systematic pharmacotherapy)	18	7855	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.44 [1.25, 1.65]
1.2 Counselling plus NRT versus NRT alone	4	1732	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.27 [1.02, 1.59]

Comparison 1. Individual counselling compared to minimal contact control

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 2. More intensive versus less intensive counselling

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Smoking cessation at longest follow‐up Show forest plot	5	1897	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.96 [0.74, 1.25]

1.1 No pharmacotherapy	2	478	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.08 [0.53, 2.22]
1.2 Adjunct to pharmacotherapy	4	1419	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.94 [0.71, 1.25]
2 Sensitivity analyses for Alterman 2001 in intensive versus brief counselling comparison Show forest plot	5		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only

2.1 Using Alterman high versus low	5	1817	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.06 [0.81, 1.37]
2.2 Using Alterman high versus moderate	5	1817	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	1.20 [0.91, 1.58]

Comparison 2. More intensive versus less intensive counselling

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

Comparison 3. Comparisons between counselling approaches of similar intensity

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Smoking cessation at longest follow‐up Show forest plot	3		Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	Subtotals only

1.1 Relapse Prevention versus Health Belief model	1	160	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.94 [0.45, 1.98]
1.2 Motivational Interviewing versus Health Education	1	755	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.51 [0.34, 0.76]
1.3 Counselling versus equal sessions of psychoeducation	1	463	Risk Ratio (M‐H, Fixed, 95% CI)	0.93 [0.62, 1.39]

Comparison 3. Comparisons between counselling approaches of similar intensity

Ir a la tabla de la revisión

The Cochrane Library

Scolaris Language Selector Scolaris Language Selector

Idioma de la Revisión Cochrane

Idioma de la web

Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet Scolaris Content Language Banner Portlet