Ramos 2010.

Methods	Study design: Randomized controlled trial Country: Spain Recruitment: People who attended health centres Group size: not stated
Participants	287 smokers (from 10 health centres) in the preparatory phase of smoking cessation 54% women Therapists: 1 physician and nurse "microteam" per health centre
Interventions	All participants were offered NRT or bupropion 1. Minimal intervention: usual care provided by health worker with basic training 2. Individual intervention: 6 sessions, motivational interviewing to increase motivation to quit smoking and prevent relapses after smoking cessation 3. Group intervention: Same as 2 in group format, matched content and number of sessions
Outcomes	Continuous abstinence at 12 m Validation: CO, cutoff unclear
Notes	New for 2017 update 3 vs 2 included in Comparison 1.2.1 'Smoking cessation Group programme vs individual therapy ‐ Group vs individual (similar intensity & content)' although group participants were reported to have received more contact 3 vs 1 included in Comparison 1.3.1 'Smoking cessation Group programme vs brief intervention ‐ Physician, nurse, or pharmacist advice'
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	Not described
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	"An allocation concealment method based on the use of sequentially‐numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes was used…A block of 60 envelopes (20 for III, 20 for IGI and 20 for MI) was prepared in the central research unit for each participating health centre and subsequently sent out."
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Biochemical validation of abstinence
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	High risk	Fewer minimal intervention participants completed CO validation than other groups; overall, very few participants completed 12 m CO follow‐up visit