Lennox 1998.
| Study characteristics | ||
| Methods | Design: Cluster‐randomized controlled trial Setting: General practices in Aberdeen, UK Recruitment: Mailing of questionnaire to adults from practice list |
|
| Participants | 16 providers (8 intervention, 8 control). 2588 people who smoked (aged 16 ‐ 65) identified through questionnaires, av. age not reported, av. cpd not reported |
|
| Interventions | Intervention:1‐day training for providers on the stages of change for smoking cessation Control: usual care. No further details reported |
|
| Outcomes | Continuous abstinence from 8m to 14m Validation: None Secondary outcomes: Quit attempts Measures of provider implementation: Ask |
|
| Funding Source | Funded by the Chief Scientist Office. Scottish Office Department of Health. Grampian Health Board funded the running of the workshops | |
| Author's declarations of interest | Not reported | |
| Notes | Strategy: Provider training Level: Provider Comparison type: Single component vs. standard care |
|
| Risk of bias | ||
| Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
| Sequence Generation | Low risk | QUOTE: "A computer‐generated random sample" |
| Allocation concealment | Low risk | QUOTE: "A computer‐generated random sample" |
| Blinding of outcome assessors All outcomes | Low risk | Smoking status was self‐reported. The intervention was a 1‐day training workshop aimed at staff so the number of face‐to‐face contacts differed between arms at practice level, but not at participant level |
| Incomplete outcome data All outcomes | Low risk | At practice level, no practices were lost to follow‐up (n = 0/16). At participant level, attrition rates were under 50% and similar between groups. The overall loss to follow‐up was 24.1% (n = 408/1693); 24.9% (n = 224/898) in the intervention group and 23.1% (n = 184/795) in the control group were lost to follow‐up at 14 months |
| Recruitment bias (cluster RCTs only) | Low risk | Participants were affiliated with the practice before randomization |
| Balanced baseline characteristics? (cluster RCTs only) | Low risk | QUOTE: "There was no significant difference between the two arms of the study in response rate, age, sex, addiction score or readiness to change smoking behaviour. Intervention subjects were less affluent than control subjects, and regression techniques were therefore used to adjust for deprivation" |
| Adjustment for clustering in analysis? (cluster RCTs only) | Low risk | QUOTE: "A generalised linear mixed model (GLMM) approach used regression techniques which added the general practice, as a random factor nested within the treatment groups, to the other fixed‐effect factors" |