Tuisku 2016.

Methods	Country: Finland Recruitment: community
Participants	180 (in relevant arms) 18 to 26 years old, smoked daily for at least past month, smoked > 100 cigarettes in life, light smokers (as per Heaviness of Smoking Index based on cpd and time to first cigarette) only included in this review 52% female, median age 21, median cpd 10
Interventions	1. NRT patch (10 mg/16 h) for 8 weeks 2. Placebo Level of support: high (individual smoking cessation counselling of 30 mins (and planned for week 52))
Outcomes	7‐day PP at 6 months (Methods section also states 12 months follow‐up but results not reported) Validation: none
Notes	New for 2017 update Funding: Ministry of Social Affairs and Health, Finland; Finnish Research Foundation of the Pulmonary Disease; Finnish Medical Society Duodecim Participants were assessed as light or heavy smokers. Light smokers were randomized to placebo or 10 mg NRT patches. Heavy smokers were randomized to varenicline or 15 mg NRT patches. First comparison is eligible for inclusion in this review (NRT vs no NRT). Second comparison is not (NRT vs varenicline). Cannot combine NRT 15 mg group with 10 mg group – different populations randomized
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Quote: “After assessment… at the baseline visit, simple randomisation with a computer‐generated random list… was used to allocate study subjects into the different treatment groups”
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not specified
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	High risk	Quote: “The placebo patch was not identical to the nicotine patch" “the study was not conducted in a blinded manner”
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Dropouts: 22/86 for placebo, 18/94 for NRT
Other bias	High risk	12‐month cessation measured but not reported