| Methods |
Setting: government outpatient clinic, Hong Kong.
Recruitment: older smokers, unselected. |
| Participants |
865 smokers, aged > 65, 92% male, 49% smoking > 10 cpd |
| Interventions |
1. No intervention.
2. Written materials (Chinese translation of American Cancer Society booklet).
3. Physician advice (1min, based on 4As).
4. Physician advice and booklet.
Intervention level: minimal (3 & 4).
Aids used: none; follow‐up visits: none. |
| Outcomes |
Abstinence at 1 yr (sustained from 3m).
Validation: poor response to request for urine specimen so data based on self report. |
| Notes |
Groups 3 & 4 compared to 1 & 2 for minimal advice vs control; full paper provided by Professor Lam. |
| Risk of bias |
| Bias |
Authors' judgement |
Support for judgement |
| Random sequence generation (selection bias) |
Low risk |
"table of random numbers" |
| Allocation concealment (selection bias) |
Unclear risk |
"Every doctor was given a set of sealed envelopes with serial numbers."; unclear if envelopes were opaque |
| Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias)
All outcomes |
Unclear risk |
64% of participants provided data at 1 yr, breakdown by group not specified; participants with missing data were considered smoking. |
