Meyer 2008.

Study characteristics
Methods	Design: 3‐group randomized controlled trial Setting: Primary care in Germany Recruitment: For a period of 3 weeks all consecutive patients were screened for smoking status by a research nurse covering complete office hours
Participants	1499 adults who smoked, 48% F, av.age 33, 16 cpd, 64% unmotivated
Interventions	Intervention 1: participants received by post up to 3 computer‐generated tailored letters, accompanied by a series of self‐help manuals Intervention 2: • Pratitioners received 2‐hour training on smoking cessation. The practitioners received a summary sheet of basic information about their patients' smoking‐related variables, as a prompt to offer counseling • Participants received brief advice, lasting 10 minutes, from their practitioner and self‐help manuals. The intervention was delivered within the regular consultation Control: QUOTE: "no intervention beside usual practice routine was provided for the control group. No information about the participants was given to the practice team or the practitioner and no self‐help manuals have been provided"
Outcomes	6m sustained abstinence 24m Validation: None
Funding Source	Funded by the German Federal Ministry of Research and Education (grant no.01EB0120, 01EB0420), the Social Ministry of the Stateof Mecklenburg‐Vorpommern (grant no. IX311a406.68.43.05) and the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, grant no. JO150/6‐1)
Author's declarations of interest	Not reported
Notes	Strategy: Tailored materials, flow sheet, provider training Level: Patient, provider, practice Comparison types: Single component vs. standard care; multicomponent vs. standard care
Risk of bias
Bias	Authors' judgement	Support for judgement
Sequence Generation	High risk	Assigned based on the week they were seen at the practice
Allocation concealment	High risk	Assigned based on the week they were seen at the practice
Blinding of outcome assessors All outcomes	High risk	Smoking status was self‐reported and participants in the brief advice group had additional 10 minutes in their consultation to listen to the advice
Incomplete outcome data All outcomes	Low risk	The overall loss to follow‐up was 37.2% (n = 558/1499);42.8 % (n = 209/488) in the tailored letter group, 33.8% (n = 136/402) in the brief advice group and 35.0% (n = 213/609) in the control group were lost to follow‐up at 24 months