Table 2.
Primary Outcomes.
| References | Title | Year | Type of Substance | Measurement used for Assessment | Intervention Effect on Substance Use | Odds Ratio | Confidence Interval | p-Value | Quality Assessment Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bullock, L., et al. [36] | Baby BEEP: A Randomized Controlled Trial of Nurses’ Individualized Social Support for Poor Rural Pregnant Smokers | 2009 | Smoking | Readiness to Stop Smoking, The Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence and Dosage (cotinine < 30ng/mL) |
The nurse-delivered social support telephone intervention was not more effective than booklets alone or usual care in reducing smoking behaviour. | 1.18 | 0.90–1.54 | 0.239 | 3 |
| Naughton, F. [41] | Large multi-centre pilot randomized controlled trial testing a low-cost, tailored, self-help smoking cessation text message intervention for pregnant smokers (MiQuit) | 2017 | Smoking | Validated 4-week continuous abstinence (CO readings < 9ppm), Self-reported 4-week continuous abstinence, 7-day point prevalence for 4-weeks continuous abstinence |
No statistical significance was found between the MiQuit intervention group and the usual care control group. | 1.32 | 0.68–2.56 | 0.409 | 1 |
| Herbec, A., et al. [42] | Pilot randomized controlled trial of an internet-based smoking cessation intervention for pregnant smokers (‘MumsQuit’) | 2014 | Smoking | Self-reported 4-week continuous abstinence | The analysis determined no significant difference when measuring continuous abstinence rates between the MumsQuit intervention and control group. | 1.50 | 0.79–2.86 | 0.217 | 1 |
| Ondersma, S. J., et al. [43] | Computer-Delivered Screening and Brief Intervention for Alcohol Use in Pregnancy: A Pilot Randomized Trail | 2015 | Alcohol Use | Self-reported 90-day abstinence period | No statistical significance was found between the intervention group and the control group when comparing abstinence. | 3.20 | 0.52–19.78 | 0.211 | 0 |
| Tzilos, Wernette. G., et al. [44] | A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of a Computer-Delivered Brief Intervention for Substance Use and Risky Sex During Pregnancy | 2018 | General substance use | Self-reported substance use behaviours using a calendar and multiple prompts | The final analysis determined no significant reduction of substance use in the intervention group compared to the control group. | 2.06 | 0.59–7.31 | 0.249 | 2 |
| van de Wulp, N., et al. [45] | Reducing Alcohol Use During Pregnancy Via Health Counseling by Midwives and Internet-Based Computer-Tailored Feedback: A Cluster Randomized Trial | 2014 | Alcohol | Average alcohol consumption during pregnancy was assessed with the 5-item Dutch Quantity-Frequency-Variability (QFV) Questionnaire |
The final analysis showed that computer-tailoring respondents used alcohol significantly less often when compared to usual care respondents. | 2.77 | 1.05–7.32 | 0.040 | 2 |