Huber 2003.
Methods | Setting: academic research centre, Germany Recruitment: community volunteers | |
Participants | 225 smokers (102 in relevant arms); 55% F, av age 38, av cpd 28 | |
Interventions | Pharmacotherapy: nicotine gum, 2 or 4 mg 1. 5 x 90‐min weekly meetings. Included contracting, reinforcement, relaxation, skills training 2. Same schedule of meetings, 45‐min only, focus on sharing experiences 3. As 1, no nicotine gum. Not included in this review 4. Wait‐list control for 6 m. Not included in this review |
|
Outcomes | PP abstinence at 12 m Validation: CO ≤ 4 ppm | |
Source of Funding/CoI | Not specified. No declarations of interest | |
Notes | Control and intervention fell into same categories for number and duration of sessions. | |
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Randomised, method not described |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | No details given |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Biochemically validated |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | 31 people attending 2 or fewer meetings not included in analysis. Said to be evenly distributed. Later dropouts included as smokers; 90% of those receiving therapy (excluded wait‐list group 4, who were also excluded from this review) followed up at 12 m. |