Methods | Setting: quit smoking clinics, Malaysia Recruitment: eligible clinic attendees |
|
Participants | 231 smokers, 120 in phone support arm and 111 in control 96.1% male, average age: 48, average cigarettes/day: 14 |
|
Interventions | 1. Relapse prevention: as control with an additional phone call after each visit in month 1 providing information, encouragement, etc. 2. Control: attend quit smoking clinic 4 times in month 1, 2 times in month 2 with a phone call after each visit, and 1 visit with 2 phone calls in month 3, self‐help materials throughout |
|
Outcomes | Point prevalence abstinence at 6 months Validation: CO ≥ 7 ppm at 6 months |
|
Notes | Dropouts counted as continuing smokers Funding not declared Declaration of Interests: "The authors declare that they have no competing interests." |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Assignments created by Urn design |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No information on concealment |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | No information on blinding |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Biochemically validated abstinence |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Low dropout rate at 6 months |