Maguire 2001.

Methods	Design: RT Groups: intervention group (Pharmacists Action on Smoking (PAS)); control group (usual care)
Participants	Pharmacies: 124 (1 pharmacist per site) Pharmacy workers: 124 pharmacists (100 in Northern Ireland, 24 in London) ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user: 484 smokers mean age: intervention 42 years; control 38 years % female: intervention 40.37%; control 43.8% Setting: urban Country: UK
Interventions	Pharmacy worker‐directed intervention: before study, pharmacists were sent the pharmacy‐based smoking cessation (PAS model) documentation and literature review and were asked to study it. Attended workshops on epidemiology, smoking statistics, the use of nicotine replacement therapy, the cycle of change model and the PAS model. Researchers visited the pharmacists to provide support and to address any queries they had in implementing the model. Delivered by: researcher Type: smoking cessation, education Mode of delivery: group; individual face‐to‐face; written materials TDF: knowledge, skills, belief about consequences, environment, context and resources, behavioural regulation Duration: 1 x 3‐hour workshop Pharmacy worker control: it appears the same pharmacists saw both intervention and control groups. ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user‐directed intervention: patients received counselling using PAS approach Delivered by: pharmacist Type: smoking cessation: behaviour change Mode of delivery: individual face‐to‐face; written materials TDF: knowledge, reinforcement, goals, environment, context and resources Duration: Length of intervention: weekly sessions for 4 weeks, then monthly for 3 months Follow‐up: 3, 6 and 12 months (intervention ended at 4 months) Pharmacy user control: usual care including the provision of nicotine replacement therapy as appropriate
Outcomes	Pharmacy worker: Uptake: not reported Qualitative experience of delivering study ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Pharmacy user: Clinical: not assessed Psychological health: not assessed Behavioural: smoking abstinence (cotinine confirmed) Quality of life: not assessed Process: not assessed Costs: not assessed
Notes	Study/intervention name: Pharmacist Action on Smoking (PAS) Funding source: Medical Research Council and Northern Ireland Department of Health and Social Services Also informed by Maguire 1996 (additional reference under Maguire 2001)
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomised using a sealed envelope technique
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	Low risk	Blind to allocation
Baseline outcome measures similar	Low risk	All participants were smokers at baseline.
Baseline characteristics similar	Unclear risk	Differences between groups not reported
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Where data were missing for participants, the participants were assumed to still be smoking.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Objective outcome measure
Protection against contamination	High risk	Within pharmacy randomisation
Selective reporting (reporting bias)	Low risk	Not noted
Other bias	Low risk	Not noted
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes	High risk	Pharmacy workers aware of group