Summary of findings for the main comparison. Print‐based self‐help compared to no materials for smoking cessation.
| Print‐based self‐help compared to no materials for smoking cessation | ||||||
| Patient or population: people who smoke; not selected for interest in quitting smoking Settings: community ‐ materials provided without personal contact Intervention: print‐based self‐help materials Comparison: no materials | ||||||
| Outcomes | Illustrative comparative risks* (95% CI) | Relative effect (95% CI) | No. of participants (studies) | Certainty of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments | |
| Assumed risk | Corresponding risk | |||||
| No materials | Print‐based self‐helpmaterials | |||||
| Abstinence ‐ non‐tailored self‐help Follow‐up: 6+ months | Moderate‐risk population1 | RR 1.19 (1.03 to 1.37) | 13,241 (11 studies) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate2,3 | No evidence of effect detected in other studies where the controls received other materials (n = 6), or wher all participants had personal contact (n = 5) or received brief advice (n = 11) | |
| 50 per 1000 | 60 per 1000 (52 to 69) | |||||
| Abstinence ‐ individually tailored self‐help Follow‐up: 6+ months | Moderate‐risk population1 | RR 1.34 (1.19 to 1.51) | 14,359 (10 studies) | ⊕⊕⊕⊝ moderate4 | ||
| 50 per 1000 | 81 per 1000 (71 to 91) | |||||
| CI: confidence interval; RR: risk ratio. | ||||||
| GRADE Working Group grades of evidence High certainty: we are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the estimate of the effect. Moderate certainty: we are moderately confident in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a possibility that it is substantially different. Low certainty: our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Very low certainty: we have very little confidence in the effect estimate: the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. | ||||||
1Control group success rate based on average across studies. Low rate reflects intervention in participants not selected on basis of motivation to quit. All studies conducted in high‐income countries. 2Most studies at high or unclear risk of bias, but no evidence of differential effect based on risk of bias. Not downgraded. 3Downgraded one level for indirectness: indirectly relevant to populations in low‐ and middle‐income countries because evidence for this comparison came from studies conducted solely in high‐income countries, and there is reason to believe the intervention might work differently in low‐ and middle‐income countries. 4Downgraded one level for risk of bias: all but one study at high or unclear risk of bias. One study at low risk of bias was small with wide confidence intervals.