| One form of behavioural treatment compared to a different form of behavioural treatment in smokers with COPD |
|
Patient or population: smokers with COPD
Settings: in‐ and outpatients
Intervention: one form of behavioural treatment
Comparison: a different form of behavioural treatment |
| Outcomes |
Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) |
Relative effect
(95% CI) |
No of Participants
(studies) |
Quality of the evidence
(GRADE) |
Comments |
| Assumed risk |
Corresponding risk |
| A different form of behavioural treatment |
One form of behavioural treatment |
|
Prolonged abstinence at longest follow‐up
Follow‐up: 6 to 12 months |
See comment |
See comment |
Not estimable |
739
(4 studies) |
See comment |
No pooling due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Individual RR were 2.18 (1.05, 4.49), RR 0.97 (0.47, 1.99), RR 1.09 (0.59, 2.04), and RR not estimable. 3 of the 4 studies had a low risk of bias. 1 study had a high risk of bias due to poor adherence to the study protocol |
|
Point prevalence abstinence at longest follow‐up
Follow‐up: 6 to 12 months |
See comment |
See comment |
Not estimable |
500
(3 studies) |
See comment |
No pooling due to clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Individual RR were 1.67 (0.68, 4.11), RR 1.35 (0.80, 2.28), and RR 0.15 (0.01, 2.83). 1 study had a low risk of bias, 1 study had a high risk of bias due to participants' poor adherence to the study protocol, and the remaining study had an unclear risk of bias |
| *The basis for the assumed risk (e.g. the median control group risk across studies) is provided in footnotes. The corresponding risk (and its 95% confidence interval) is based on the assumed risk in the comparison group and the relative effect of the intervention (and its 95% CI).
CI: confidence interval; COPD: chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; RR: risk ratio |
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence
High quality: Further research is very unlikely to change our confidence in the estimate of effect.
Moderate quality: Further research is likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and may change the estimate.
Low quality: Further research is very likely to have an important impact on our confidence in the estimate of effect and is likely to change the estimate.
Very low quality: We are very uncertain about the estimate. |
