Choi 2014.

Methods	Cluster‐randomised controlled trial Location: Michigan, USA Funding: Michigan foundation (n011646‐1465rfp) and the national institutes of health (5r21ca152247‐02). Recruitment: Participants were recruited during a regularly scheduled safety training session, where the study nurse described the study to potential participants. Participants who completed the baseline survey received USD 15, USD 15 for the 30‐day survey, and USD 20 for the 6‐month survey and cotinine test. The study was conducted between 2010 and 2012.
Participants	Participants (n = 145) ('Tobacco Tactics' n = 67; '1‐800‐quit‐now' n = 59) operating engineers aged 18 years or older, current smokers, and interested in participating in a cessation programme. Exclusion criteria: Operating engineers who were non‐English speaking, or pregnant. Participants were 20.7% female (n = 30), and mean age was 42.0 years (SD = 9.5). 86.2% were white (n = 125), 13.8% (n = 20) were non‐white. 61.1% (n = 88) completed high school or less than high school, 38.9% (n = 56) completed more than high school. Average/median CPD was 20.9 (SD = 9.9), and 86.9% (n = 126) reported a previous quit attempt. The proportion of participants thinking about quitting in the next 30 days was higher in the 1‐800‐quit‐now (n = 44, 56.4%) group compared to website arm (n = 32, 47.8%) (P = 0.042)
Interventions	The 'Tobacco Tactics' website was a tailored and interactive Internet intervention as an adjunct to telephone‐based behavioural support, with pharmacotherapy. Behavioural and pharmacotherapy support were offered at 2, 7, 14, 21 and 30 days after the training, website access was ongoing during the study period. The website contains humorous graphics tailored to operating engineers, offered tailored cessation feedback, and follow‐up nurse counselling was offered by telephone or email or both, and/or online community. The content included interactive cognitive behavioural therapy exercises including a self‐assessment of tobacco habit, assessment of nicotine dependence, calculation of money savings, tips for preparing to quit, a change plan work sheet, and strategies for coping with relapses. Interactive components included mechanisms for users to assess their smoking habits, set a quit date, and monitor weekly progress; a nurse monitored the e‐community as a group moderator 3 times per week, answered questions, and stimulated group discussion. On each log‐off, participants answered questions about their tobacco habits which produced a graphic displaying their progress over time. Participants were offered over‐the‐counter nicotine patches, gum, lozenges, or a combination for highly‐dependent smokers. The nurse made follow‐up telephone and/or email counselling contacts at 2, 7, 14, 21 and 30 days after the training to reinforce website visits, promote skill building, and monitor pharmacologic treatment. '1‐800‐quit‐now' was a non‐internet‐based active control arm delivered at 2, 7, 14, 21, and 30 days after training, and smoking cessation medication was also offered to participants. In the '1‐800‐quit‐now' arm participants were encouraged by the study nurse to call and were given time to do so at their safety training class. The first time participants called the quit line, they received a personal coach who assisted them in setting a quit date and making an individualised quit plan, followed by up to 5 telephone coaching sessions around the caller’s quit date and free NRT (patches or gum), which were all equivalent to the tobacco tactics intervention. Those who had failed on NRT in the past discussed were offered bupropion or varenicline
Outcomes	Outcome data were collected at 1 and 6 months. Primary outcome was bioverified 7‐day PPA. Secondary outcomes were self‐reported quit rates; cotinine levels; number of quit attempts; nicotine dependence; CPD; smoking self‐efficacy; contacts with interventions; medications used; helpfulness of the interventions; and willingness to recommend the interventions to others
Notes	The authors declared no conflicts of interest.
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Unclear risk	No information provided
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Attrition rates: 31% website‐tobacco tactics, 24% 1‐800‐quit‐now