Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Study

Abdullah 2005

Biochemically validated quit rate: Intervention 47 (10.6) Control 21 (4.5)
Had not quit but had reduced intake: Intervention 145 (32.6) Control 83 (18.1)
Stopped smoking for at least 24 hours: Intervention 145 (32.7) Control 136 (29.7)
Complete restriction: Intervention 113 (24.6) Control 151 (34.1)
Partial restriction: Intervention 278 (62.7) Control 259 (56.4)

Armstrong 2000

Smoking in house around infant (maternal self report verified by researcher observation during home visit)
Intervention 8.6% v Control 23.8% (P<0.05)

Chan 2005

No statistically significant evidence of effect.
Quit rate at 1 month post intervention: Intervention 7.5% [95%CI: 0 to 21] v 2.5% [95% CI: 0 to 7] control NS
Reduced smoking consumption by half (self report): Intervention: 15% Control: 10% NS
Reported quit attempts in last 30 days: Intervention 20% Control 7.5% NS
Moved up the stage of readiness to quit: Intervention 17.5% Control 10% NS

Chan 2006a

Three most frequently reported actions taken by the mother to protect the child from passive smoking at home: opening the windows (N=641, 43.9%), asking the father not to smoke near the child (N=608, 41.6%), and moving the child away from the smoke (N=482, 33%).
Moved the children away when they were exposed to the fathers’ smoke at home at 3‐month follow up (78.4% vs. 71.1%; P= 0.01) NS at 6 and 12 months.
Number of smokers (excluding the father) living with the child at 12 month follow up (11%vs13% P=0.049)
Smokers who smoked at home (Excluding Child’s Father), at 12‐month follow up (92% vs 93% NS)
Child’s ETS exposure at home by any smoker 3 mths Intervention 37% vs Control 42% (P=0.02) 6mths 51% vs 53% P=0.48 12 mths 52% vs 58% P=0.03

Chilmonczyk 1992

No evidence of effect.
Intervention: 27/52 provided follow‐up urine. Control 29/51 provided follow‐up urine. Mean log urinary cotinine difference x100: Intervention group 2.05, control 2.17. P=0.26

Conway 2004

No significant effect.
Hair nicotine (log ng/mg) 3mth Intervention 0.28, Control 0.32;12mth Intervention 0.23, Control0.23 NS
Hair cotinine (logng/mg) 3mth Intervention 0.04, Control 0.04;12mth Intervention 0.02, Control 0.04 NS
Parent report reduction: % confirmed reducers 3mth Intervention 52%, Control 46%; 12mth Intervention 61%, Control 56% NS

Curry 2003

Abstinence rates: 3 mth Intervention 7.7% vs Control 3.4%; 12mth Intervention 13.5% vs Control 6.9% ‐ 12 mth difference statistically significant.
Serious attempt to quit at 12 months Adjusted OR 1.53 (95% CI 0.96 to 2.44)
Ever quit for 24h at 12 months Adjusted OR 0.94 (95% CI 0.59 to 1.5)
Prevalent abstinence 3 months Adjusted OR 2.40 (95% CI 0.85 to 7.8) 12 months Adjusted OR 2.77 (95% CI 1.24 to 6.60)
Sustained abstinence (abstinent at 3 and 12 months) Adjusted OR 1.83 (95% CI 0.29 to 14.30)

Davis 1992

No evidence of difference between self‐help guides.
Self‐reported quit attempts: Guide 1 121/198 (61%), Guide 2 122/204 (60%), Guide 3 147/229 (64%);
Self‐reported abstinence for last week:
Guide 1 28/198 (14%),
Guide 2 24/204 (12%),
Guide 3 27/229 (12%)
P>0.05

Elder 1996

No evidence of effect on tobacco‐free school policy after 3 years:
Intervention 78% of 56 schools,
Control 75% of 40 schools

Emmons 2001

Quit rates: Intervention 7.5%, Control 10.1%, P>0.05
CPD: no effect
Kitchen and TV room air nicotine (log transformed units): Intervention 3.7 & 3.1 fell to 2.6 & 2.3, Control 3.0 & 3.5 changed to 6.9 & 3.5. * P<0.05,

Eriksen 1996

No evidence of effect.
Quit smoking: Intervention 7/222 (3%) vs Control 1/ 221 (0.5%);
Stopped indoor smoking 4/222 vs 4/ 221;
Any positive change 32/222 (14%) vs 34/221 (15%)

Fossum 2004

Self‐reported smoking (number of cigarettes) 1 month before childbirth: Intervention 13.1 vs Control 10.8 NS; 3 months after childbirth Intervention 12.8 vs Control 8.2 (significant); Past 24 hrs Intervention 11.8 vs Control 7.8 (significant).
Salivary cotinine: Mean for Intervention reduced from 185 ng/ml to 165; mean for Control increased from 245 to 346 ng/ml.
Weak correlation between mother's reported rate of smoking and cotinine levels for both control and intervention groups.

Greenberg 1994

Parents report significant reduction in number of CPD: Intervention 12.5 CPD pre vs 7.7 CPD at 12month follow up, Control 12.3 CPD pre vs 13.3 at follow up P=0.01. Child urinary cotinine does not support this. Baseline mean urinary cotinine/ creatinine (nmol/mmol) Intervention 66 vs Control 51; at follow up Intervention 107 vs 98 Control. p=NS
Prevalence of persistent lower respiratory symptoms Intervention 17.8%, Control 30.9% [difference 13.1%, 95% CI ‐1.0 to 27.0]

Groner 2000

No evidence of effect.
Self‐reported quit rates: Intervention Child Health Group 7/153, Mother's Health Group 4/164, Control 7/ 162. P=NS
Self‐reported CPD reduced in all groups;
Self‐reported not smoking indoors reduced: Intervention CHG 24, MHG 12, Control 13. P<0.05

Hovell 2000

Reduction in parent‐reported child exposure to cigarettes in the home and in total. At home reported exposure Intervention baseline 3.9 CPD, follow up 0.52 CPD vs Control 3.51 CPD baseline, 1.20 CPD follow up. The trend for parent‐reported total CPD exposure was similar.
Reports not supported by child urinary cotinine concentrations (ng/ml). Intervention baseline 10.93, follow up 10.47 vs Control baseline 9.43, follow up 17.47; 56% reduction (95% CI 48 to 63)

Hovell 2002

No significant effect.
Decline in reported ETS exposure from (Intervention) 97% to 52% vs (Control) 93% to 69% at end of intervention (month 4).
At follow up month 13, 9 months post‐intervention (Intervention) 52% to 45% and (Control) 69% to 54%.
Average parent‐reported exposure levels declined over the follow‐up period from 0.57 to 0.47 CPD (Intervention) and 1.11 to 0.71 CPD (Control). These results show a difference of mean 0.34 CPD reduction in exposure by report.
Biological verification of child exposure reveals a less successful outcome. Child cotinine levels fell in the intervention group immediately post‐intervention (month 4) 1.44 to 1.19 ng/mL, and rose in control group 1.17 to 1.35 ng/mL. Between end of intervention and follow up 9 months later levels fell 1.19 to.97 ng/mL (intervention) and 1.35 to 0.86 ng/mL (control). There was no significant difference in the mothers' rate of smoking cessation between groups.

Hughes 1991

No evidence of effect on homes with smoker: Intervention baseline 60% of 47 homes, follow up 52% vs Control baseline 57% of 48 homes, follow up 51% P=NS

Irvine 1999

No evidence of effect.
Mean decrease in child salivary cotinine (ng/ml): Intervention 0.70 vs Control 0.88. Difference= 0.19, 95% CI ‐0.86 to 0.48
Mean increase in mothers' salivary cotinine (ng/ml): Intervention 3.1 vs Control 1.8. Difference= 1.3, 95% CI ‐26.4 to 23.9
Self‐reported quit attempts: Intervention 101/213 vs Control 97/222, P=NS

Kallio 2006

At child 8 years of age 10.1% (29/287) of mothers and 19.7% (43/218) fathers in the intervention group smoked regularly. The corresponding %s for the control group were 15.1% (45/298) mothers and 25.1% (60/239) fathers. Additionally 5.9% (17/287) of intervention group mothers and 8.3% (18/218) of intervention group fathers smoked occasionally compared with 5.7% (17/298) of control group mothers and 6.7% (16/239) of control group fathers (NS).

Kimata 2004

After 1 month urinary cotinine levels reduced 285±43 ngmL‐1 to 2.2±0.85 ngmL‐1 in AEDS cessation group, 257±31 ngmL‐1 to 1.8±52 ngmL‐1 in normal child cessation group and 274±42 ngmL‐1 vs 298±52 ngmL‐1 in control group of children with AEDS. AEDS children showed significant reduction in SCORAD index skin wheal (mm) from 9.9 baseline to 7.5; Control group 9.6 baseline to 9.3. Also significant changes in response to house dust mite & cat dander & lower neutrophil levels.

Krieger 2005

Report that 20% of the sample quit smoking and that among smokers who did not go outside to smoke prior to intervention, a quarter did so after education, but data are not provided and it is unclear whether intervention outcomes were different between groups.
Homes where smoking was reported as not allowed at baseline 80% (high intensity group) vs 76% (low intensity group) and at exit 77% (high) vs 80% (low) P=0.33 NS.

McIntosh 1994

Number of smokers who moved outside: Intervention 7/30, Control 4/30.
Urinary cotinine concentrations of children of subjects reportedly smoking outside are above 10.0 in 4/6 (range 6.7 to 54) in Intervention children tested, and in 3/3 (range 12.2 to 21.5) control children tested. These levels suggest significant ETS exposure.

Nuesslein 2006

Calculated nicotine consumption Intervention: 12 micrograms to 4.65 micrograms vs Control: 12 micrograms to 7.5 micrograms NS
Urinary cotinine levels Intervention 3520 ng/ml to 741 ng/ml vs Control 4572 ng/ml to 724 ng/ml P>0.05 NS
Across the entire sample (both intervention and control groups) there was an overall reduction in self‐reported smoking with average number of cigarettes smoked reduced from 17 to 10 per day and significant reduction in calculated nicotine consumption using self report data 12 micrograms to 5.5 micrograms (P<0.05), urinary cotinine 4101 ng/ml to 741 ng/ml (P<0.05).

Ratner 2001

6 month Follow up: 36% abstinent, 26% occasional, 38% daily smoking. 76% homes smokefree.
12 month Follow up: 20% abstinent, 35% occasional, 46% daily. 76% homes smokefree
No difference between groups.
6 month Follow up abstinence was 41% vs 30% (intervention vs control) but at 12 months abstinence was sustained in 21% vs 18.5% (intervention vs control) NS.
Daily smoking at 6 months was 31% vs 45% (intervention vs control) but at 12 months was 41% vs 50% (intervention vs control). NS
Abstinence reported as 38% vs 27% (treatment vs control) NS.

Schonberger 2005

At 6 month Follow up
Maternal post‐natal smoking Intervention 52% (14/27) vs. Control 28% (8/30) P=0.04)
Partner smoking Intervention 31% (14/44) vs Control 20% 9/45) NS
Smoking by others Intervention 47% vs Control 50% NS

Severson 1997

Cessation at 6 & 12 months: Intervention 25/1073 (2.3%), Control 10/802 (1.2%), P<0.05*, 1‐tailed test
Cessation at 12 months: Intervention 59/1073 (5.5%), Control 38/802 (4.7%) NS.
Relapse prevention at 6 & 12 months: Intervention 200/609 (33%). Control 109/417 (26%), P<0.05*, 1‐tailed test
Relapse prevention at 12 months: Intervention 261/609 (43%), Control 163/417 (39%)
* when controlling for other variables this effect was lost.
Significant benefits of intervention on CPD, readiness to quit, likelihood of making a quit attempt, attitude towards smoking, knowledge of ETS effects on children.

Vineis 1993

Smoking cessation for mothers: Intervention 12/74 vs Control 10/84, OR 1.4, 95%CI 0.6 to 3.5
Smoking cessation for fathers: Intervention 18/173 vs Control 26/244 OR 1.0

Wahlgren 1997

Intensive intervention was able to demonstrate a statistically significant but very small reduction in cigarette exposure from parents' cigarettes reported by parents without biological verification. Mean number of parent cigarettes smoked in presence of child fell in Intervention group: 5.8CPD baseline, 3.4CPD at clinic pre‐intervention to 1.2 CPD at 6 months following completion of intervention. In control group, parent reported exposure fell from 8.0 baseline, 5.7 pre‐intervention to 4.6 CPD at 6 month follow up. P for trend <0.01.
Environmental monitor (1 room with heaviest child exposure) measured air nicotine (mcg/ cubic metre). Intervention group baseline 1.7, follow up 1.9 vs Control baseline 2.3, follow up1.4

Wakefield 2002

Home smoking ban:
Intervention 41% at baseline, 49% at Follow up vs Control 40% at baseline, 42% at Follwo up. Relative increase in bans not significant; P=0.40
Car smoking bans: Intervention baseline 33%, Follow up = 52%, Control baseline 37%, Follow up 48%, NS;
Low rates of parental cessation, no difference between groups.
Urinary cotinine measured for 209 children: Mean cotinine/ creatinine Intervention B = 22.8 nmol/mmol Follow up 21.0, Control baseline 25.7, Follow up 21.0, NS, P=0.40

Wiggins 2005

No significant effect of either intervention.
Support health visitor group vs control group, RR 0.86 (95% CI 0.86 to 1.19); Community support group RR 0.97 (95% CI 0.72 to 1.33)

Wilson 2001

Of 51 children with complete urinary cotinine: creatinine ratio (CCR) data. Log CCR (ng/mg) Intervention baseline 1.82, Follow up 1.27 vs Control baseline 2.34, Follow up 1.93, adjusted Diff ‐0.38, adjusted P= 0.26.
Proportion with >1 acute asthma visit/ year: Intervention baseline 50, Follow up 29.6, Control baseline 37.2, Follow up 46.5, OR 0.32, P=0.03
No significant differences in hospitalisation, prohibition of smoking in home, or smoking.

Winickoff 2008

Prevalence of self‐reported 7 day abstinence 38% at baseline and 30% at follow up in the control group vs 31% at baseline and 30% at follow up in the intervention group (Effect size = 13% P=NS) Cotinine‐confirmed 7 day abstinence for baseline current smokers NS.
For baseline current smokers 18% in the control and 64% in the intervention group reported making a 24hr quit attempt by follow up (P=.005).

Woodward 1987

No evidence of effect.
Mother self‐reported quitting: Intervention 6%, Control 2.2%, P=0.25.
Median infant urinary cotinine levels (mcg/litre): Intervention 11.0 (n=48) vs Control 10.0 (n=53), P=NS

Yilmaz 2006

Quit smoking: Child intervention group 24.3%; Mother intervention group 13%; Control 0.8%. (χ2 = 29.5, P<0.0001)
Smoking location change: Child intervention: 73%, Mother intervention: 46.6%, Control 11.6% (χ2 =90.1, P<0.0001)
Knowledge change (score on MCQ, possible score 0‐100): mean post‐intervention score in child intervention 63.51 (±7.35 ‐ not stated whether these ± is standard deviations, or 95% confidence intervals) mother intervention 57.69 (±10.46) control 56.68 (±7.67) (ANOVA showed that these scores differed) P<0.0001
(Note: not an intention‐to‐treat analysis)

Zakarian 2004

Both groups showed significant decline in reported exposure to mother's cigarette's/week (intervention group 18.89 at baseline to 5.41 at 12 months, control group 13.25 at baseline to 5.23 at 12 months) (P<0.001). Total exposure to cigarettes/week (intervention group 53.2 at baseline to 21.99 at 12 months, control 54.48 at baseline to 18.22 at 12 months) (P<0.001) however, no significant difference between groups.
Children's urinary cotinine concentration did not show a sigificant change over time in either group ‐ No significant difference between groups.

Zhang 1993

Number (proportion) of smoking fathers: Intervention baseline 6843/9953 (68.8%) & follow up 60.7% vs Control baseline 6274/9580 (65.5%), follow up "approximately the same" [numbers are not stated]
Proportion of fathers who quit smoking for at least 180 days:
Intervention 800/9953 (11.7%), Control 14/6274 (0.2%)

Figuras y tablas -
Analysis 1.1

Comparison 1 Results, Outcome 1 Main outcomes.

Table 1. MEDLINE and CINAHL search strategy

1. randomized controlled trial.pt.
2. randomized controlled trials/
3. random allocation/
4. controlled clinical trial.pt.
5. clinical trial.pt.
6. exp clinical trials/
7. (clin$ adj5 trial$).tw.
8. double blind method/
9. single blind method/
10. ((singl$ or doubl$ or trebl$ or tripl$) adj5 (blind$ or mask$)).tw.
11. placebos/
12. placebo$.tw.
13. random$.tw.
14. research design/
15. follow up studies/
16. exp evaluation studies/
17. prospective studies/
18. retrospective studies/
19. comparative study/
20. Cross‐Sectional Studies/
21. (control$ or prospectiv$ or volunteer$).tw.
22. or/1‐21
23. exp Smoking/
24. Tobacco Smoke Pollution/
25. 23 or 24
26. Smoking Cessation/
27. Environmental Medicine/
28. exp Environmental Pollution/
29. Public Health/
30. Health Education/
31. Health Promotion/
32. Psychotherapy/
33. or/26‐32
34. exp Family/
35. Schools, Nursery/
36. Child Day Care Centers/
37. Child Care/
38. (child$ or carer$ or caregiver$ or parent$ or famil$ or brother or sister or sib$ or nanny).tw.
39. or/34‐38
40. 22 and 25 and 33 and 39
41. limit 40 to (newborn infant or infant <1 to 23 months> or preschool child <2 to 5 years> or child <6 to 12 years>)

Figuras y tablas -
Table 1. MEDLINE and CINAHL search strategy
Table 2. EMBASE search strategy

Searched Oct 2007

S1 RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
S2 RANDOMIZATION
S3 CONTROLLED STUDY!
S4 EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE!
S5 CLINICAL TRIAL!
S6 CLIN? (5W) TRIAL?
S7 ((SINGL? OR DOUBL? OR TREBL? OR TRIPL?) (5W) (BLIND? OR MASK?))
S8 PLACEBOS
S9 PLACEBO?
S10 RANDOM?
S11 METHODOLOGY
S12 COMPARATIVE STUDY!
S13 EVALUATION AND FOLLOW UP
S14 PROSPECTIVE STUDY
S15 CONTROL? OR PROSPECTIV? OR VOLUNTEER?
S16 S1 OR S2 OR S3 OR S4 OR S5 OR S6 OR S7 OR S8 OR S9 OR S10 OR S11 OR S12 OR S13 OR S14 OR S15
S17 SMOKING/maj
S18 SMOKING CESSATION/maj
S19 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH/maj
S20 POLLUTION/maj
S21 PUBLIC HEALTH/maj
S22 HEALTH EDUCATION!/maj
S23 PSYCHOTHERAPY/maj
S24 S18 OR S19 OR S20 OR S21 OR S22 OR S23
S25 FAMILY!/maj
S26 SCHOOLS/maj
S27 SCHOOL/maj
S28 NURSERY/maj
S29 NURSERIES/maj
S30 DAY CARE/maj
S31 CHILD CARE/maj
S32 HOUSE/maj
S33 HOME/maj
S34 CARER? OR CAREGIVER? OR PARENT? OR FAMIL? OR BROTHER? OR SISTER? OR SIBLING? OR NANNY OR NANNIES
S35 S25 OR S26 OR S27 OR S28 OR S29 OR S30 OR S31 OR S32 OR S33 OR S34
S36 CHILD!
S37 NEWBORN!
S38 S36 OR S37
S39 S16 AND S17 AND S24 AND S35 AND S38
S1 RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
S2 RANDOMIZATION
S3 CONTROLLED STUDY!
S4 EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE!
S5 CLINICAL TRIAL!
S6 CLIN? (5W) TRIAL?
S7 ((SINGL? OR DOUBL? OR TREBL? OR TRIPL?) (5W) (BLIND? OR MASK?))
S8 PLACEBOS
S9 PLACEBO?
S10 RANDOM?
S11 METHODOLOGY
S12 COMPARATIVE STUDY!
S13 EVALUATION AND FOLLOW UP
S14 PROSPECTIVE STUDY
S15 CONTROL? OR PROSPECTIV? OR VOLUNTEER?
S16 S1 OR S2 OR S3 OR S4 OR S5 OR S6 OR S7 OR S8 OR S9 OR S10 OR S11 OR S12 OR S13 OR S14 OR S15
S17 SMOKING/maj
S18 SMOKING CESSATION/maj
S19 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH/maj
S20 POLLUTION/maj
S21 PUBLIC HEALTH/maj
S22 HEALTH EDUCATION!/maj
S23 PSYCHOTHERAPY/maj
S24 S18 OR S19 OR S20 OR S21 OR S22 OR S23
S25 FAMILY!/maj
S26 SCHOOLS/maj
S27 SCHOOL/maj
S28 NURSERY/maj
S29 NURSERIES/maj
S30 DAY CARE/maj
S31 CHILD CARE/maj
S32 HOUSE/maj
S33 HOME/maj
S34 CARER? OR CAREGIVER? OR PARENT? OR FAMIL? OR BROTHER? OR SISTER? OR SIBLING? OR NANNY OR NANNIES
S35 S25 OR S26 OR S27 OR S28 OR S29 OR S30 OR S31 OR S32 OR S33 OR S34
S36 CHILD!
S37 NEWBORN!
S38 S36 OR S37
S39 S16 AND S17 AND S24 AND S35 AND S38

Figuras y tablas -
Table 2. EMBASE search strategy
Table 3. HealthStar search strategy

Searched Oct 2001

1. randomized controlled trial.pt.
2. randomized controlled trials/
3. random allocation/
4. controlled clinical trial.pt.
5. clinical trial.pt.
6. exp clinical trials/
7. (clin$ adj5 trial$).tw.
8. double blind method/
9. single blind method/
10. ((singl$ or doubl$ or trebl$ or tripl$) adj5 (blind$ or mask$)).tw.
11. placebos/
12. placebo$.tw.
13. random$.tw.
14. research design/
15. follow up studies/
16. exp evaluation studies/
17. prospective studies/
18. retrospective studies/
19. comparative study/
20. Cross‐Sectional Studies/
21. (control$ or prospectiv$ or volunteer$).tw.
22. or/1‐21
23. exp Smoking/
24. Tobacco Smoke Pollution/
25. 23 or 24
26. Smoking Cessation/
27. Environmental Medicine/
28. exp Environmental Pollution/
29. Public Health/
30. exp Health Education/
31. Health Promotion/
32. exp Psychotherapy/
33. or/26‐32
34. exp Family/
35. exp schools/
36. child day care centers/
37. child care/
38. home$.mp.
39. house$.mp.
40. (child$ or carer$ or caregiver$ or parent$ or famil$ or brother or sister or sib$ or nanny).tw.
41. or/34‐40
42. 22 and 25 and 33 and 41
43. limit 42 to (newborn infant or infant <1 to 23 months> or preschool child <2 to 5 years> or child <6 to 12 years>)

Figuras y tablas -
Table 3. HealthStar search strategy
Table 4. PsycINFO search strategy

Searched Oct 2007

1. randomized controlled trial.pt.
2. randomized controlled trials/
3. random allocation/
4. controlled clinical trial.pt.
5. clinical trial.pt.
6. exp clinical trials/
7. (clin$ adj5 trial$).tw.
8. double blind method/
9. single blind method/
10. ((singl$ or doubl$ or trebl$ or tripl$) adj5 (blind$ or mask$)).tw.
11. placebos/
12. placebo$.tw.
13. random$.tw.
14. research design/
15. follow up studies/
16. exp evaluation studies/
17. prospective studies/
18. retrospective studies/
19. comparative study/
20. Cross‐Sectional Studies/
21. (control$ or prospectiv$ or volunteer$).tw.
22. or/1‐21
23. exp Smoking/
24. Tobacco Smoke Pollution/
25. 23 or 24
26. Smoking Cessation/
27. Environmental Medicine/
28. exp Environmental Pollution/
29. Public Health/
30. Health Education/
31. Health Promotion/
32. Psychotherapy/
33. or/26‐32
34. exp Family/
35. Schools, Nursery/
36. Child Day Care Centers/
37. Child Care/
38. (child$ or carer$ or caregiver$ or parent$ or famil$ or brother or sister or sib$ or nanny).tw.
39. or/34‐38
40. 22 and 25 and 33 and 39
41. limit 40 to (newborn infant or infant <1 to 23 months> or preschool child <2 to 5 years> or child <6 to 12 years>)

Figuras y tablas -
Table 4. PsycINFO search strategy
Comparison 1. Results

Outcome or subgroup title

No. of studies

No. of participants

Statistical method

Effect size

1 Main outcomes Show forest plot

Other data

No numeric data

Figuras y tablas -
Comparison 1. Results