Comparison 2. Smoke alarm promotion as part of routine child health surveillance versus control (subgroup analysis).

Outcome or subgroup title	No. of studies	No. of participants	Statistical method	Effect size
1 Final smoke alarm ownership	5	941	Odds Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.96 [1.03, 3.72]
2 Final functioning smoke alarms	6	2571	Odds Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.46 [1.15, 1.85]
3 Smoke alarms acquired	2	716	Odds Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	3.62 [0.27, 48.01]
4 Functioning smoke alarms acquired	2	716	Odds Ratio (M‐H, Random, 95% CI)	1.55 [0.84, 2.87]