Voorhees 1996.
| Methods |
Study design: controlled before‐after Sampling frame: 21 African American churches in East Baltimore Sampling method: non‐random (churches assigned to treatment and comparison conditions); participants were smokers Collection method: self report; validated with physical measurement (saliva cotinine and exhaled carbon monoxide levels) Description of the community coalition: Coalition included churches, clergy organization, non‐profit CBOs, and Johns Hopkins investigators |
|
| Participants |
Communities: East Baltimore, MD Country: USA Ages included in assessment: ≥ 18 (n = 292) Reasons provided for selection of intervention community: African American at‐risk population in Baltimore, MD Intervention community (population size): 71,291 Comparison community (population size): same |
|
| Interventions |
Name of intervention: Heart, Body, and Soul Theory: not reported Aim: smoking cessation Description of costs and resources: not reported Components of the intervention: church‐based educational information, sermons, lay health workers, smoking cessation counseling, support groups Start date: not reported Duration: 11 months |
|
| Outcomes |
Outcomes and measures: smoking quit rates Time points: baseline and 12‐month follow‐up |
|
| Notes | Funding source: government | |
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) | High risk | Not reported |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) | High risk | No allocation concealment reported |
| Baseline outcome measurement similar | Low risk | Similar smoking levels in intervention and comparison groups |
| Baseline characteristics similar | Unclear risk | Significantly different educational levels between groups |
| Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | High risk | Not blinded |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Low attrition |
| Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | High risk | No blinding reported |
| Protection against contamination | High risk | Comparison community was same as intervention community |
| Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Low risk | Relevant outcomes reported |