van der Aalst 2012.
Methods |
Setting: community, Belgium and the Netherlands Recruitment: subgroup of participants enrolled in lung cancer screening trial; identified via population registry |
|
Participants | 1284 currently smoking male participants of lung cancer screening trial, 50 to 75 years old, smokers of > 15 cpd for > 25 years or > 10 cpd for > 30 years 100% male, average age 57, average cpd 18, 55% not planning to quit within 6 months |
|
Interventions | ∙ Computer‐tailored smoking cessation advice via mail (one‐off), sent only to participants who completed questionnaire after randomisation ∙ Standard brochure (35 pages; Smoking Cessation, Why and How) |
|
Outcomes | Continuous abstinence at 2 years (prolonged; point prevalence also reported) Validation: none |
|
Notes | Participants had to return questionnaire before receiving tailored brochure – only 23% did so (147/642) In this subset, quit rates were slightly higher (14.3% prolonged as compared to 12.5% in total intervention group) but were still less than in control group and no significant difference |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not specified |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Not specified |
Blinding (performance bias and detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Not blinded, but at assessment, majority of participants were unaware of which they had been assigned to; differential misreport judged to be unlikely |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Low risk | 84% intervention and 85% control followed up at 2 years |