Berman 1995.

Methods	Setting: multi‐ethnic community, USA Recruitment: via schools; smokers interested in health screening and cessation
Participants	348 smokers, 51% female, average age 37
Interventions	All participants received cardiovascular health screening and educational materials ∙ Freedom from Smoking for You and Your Family, or Spanish equivalent; minimally tailored message at completion of 3 months' telephone follow‐up and tailored letter (group class offered after 6 months' follow‐up) ∙ How to Double Your Quitting Power, or Spanish equivalent
Outcomes	Abstinence at 6 months, continuous (other outcomes also reported, no differences in findings) Validation: attempted unsuccessfully at 12 months
Notes	No non‐self‐help control, so does not contribute to main analysis; no differences at any time point and no definition of 'abstinence'
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias)	Low risk	Randomised by school using coin toss
Allocation concealment (selection bias)	High risk	Participants enrolled proactively after randomisation, so potential for selection bias Fewer participants in control (179) than experimental (267) conditions
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes	Low risk	Biochemical validation attempted but very few participants provided samples; however, interventions of similar intensity differed only by content, so differential misreport judged unlikely
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes	Low risk	218 (62.6%) reached at 12 months' follow‐up