11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Variability and effectiveness of comparator group interventions in smoking cessation trials: a systematic review and meta‐analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aims

          To examine variability and effectiveness of interventions provided to comparator (control) groups in smoking cessation trials.

          Methods

          Systematic review with meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of behavioral interventions for smoking cessation, with or without stop‐smoking medication. We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialized Register for RCTs with objective outcomes measured at ≥ 6 months. Study authors were contacted to obtain comprehensive descriptions of their comparator interventions. Meta‐regression analyses examined the relationships of smoking cessation rates with stop‐smoking medication and behavior change techniques.

          Results

          One hundred and four of 142 eligible comparator groups ( n = 23 706) had complete data and were included in analyses. There was considerable variability in the number of behavior change techniques delivered [mean = 15.97, standard deviation (SD) = 13.54, range = 0–45] and the provision of smoking cessation medication (43% of groups received medication) throughout and within categories of comparator groups (e.g. usual care, brief advice). Higher smoking cessation rates were predicted by provision of medication [ B = 0.334, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.030–0.638, P = 0.031] and number of behavior change techniques included ( B = 0.020, 95% CI = 0.008–0.032, P < 0.001). Modelled cessation rates in comparator groups that received the most intensive support were 15 percentage points higher than those that received the least (23 versus 8%).

          Conclusions

          Interventions delivered to comparator groups in smoking cessation randomized controlled trials vary considerably in content, and cessation rates are strongly predicted by stop‐smoking medication and number of behavior change techniques delivered.

          Related collections

          Most cited references62

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Conducting Meta-Analyses inRwith themetaforPackage

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found

              The behavior change technique taxonomy (v1) of 93 hierarchically clustered techniques: building an international consensus for the reporting of behavior change interventions.

              CONSORT guidelines call for precise reporting of behavior change interventions: we need rigorous methods of characterizing active content of interventions with precision and specificity. The objective of this study is to develop an extensive, consensually agreed hierarchically structured taxonomy of techniques [behavior change techniques (BCTs)] used in behavior change interventions. In a Delphi-type exercise, 14 experts rated labels and definitions of 124 BCTs from six published classification systems. Another 18 experts grouped BCTs according to similarity of active ingredients in an open-sort task. Inter-rater agreement amongst six researchers coding 85 intervention descriptions by BCTs was assessed. This resulted in 93 BCTs clustered into 16 groups. Of the 26 BCTs occurring at least five times, 23 had adjusted kappas of 0.60 or above. "BCT taxonomy v1," an extensive taxonomy of 93 consensually agreed, distinct BCTs, offers a step change as a method for specifying interventions, but we anticipate further development and evaluation based on international, interdisciplinary consensus.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                n.black@unsw.edu.au
                Journal
                Addiction
                Addiction
                10.1111/(ISSN)1360-0443
                ADD
                Addiction (Abingdon, England)
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0965-2140
                1360-0443
                11 February 2020
                September 2020
                : 115
                : 9 ( doiID: 10.1111/add.v115.9 )
                : 1607-1617
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] Health Psychology Group, Institute of Applied Health Sciences University of Aberdeen, Health Sciences Building, Foresterhill Aberdeen UK
                [ 2 ] National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre University of New South Wales Sydney NSW Australia
                [ 3 ] Department of Clinical Psychology and Experimental Psychopathology University of Groningen Groningen the Netherlands
                [ 4 ] Department of Psychiatry and Neuropsychology, School for Mental Health and Neuroscience Maastricht University Maastricht the Netherlands
                [ 5 ] Department of Behavioral Science and Health University College London London UK
                [ 6 ] Nuffield Department of Primary Care Health Sciences Oxford UK
                [ 7 ] Centre for behavior Change University College London Gower Street London WC1E 6BT UK
                [ 8 ] Radboud University Medical Center Radboud Institute for Health Sciences, IQ Healthcare Nijmegen the Netherlands
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence to: Nicola Black, National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre 22‐32 King St, Randwick NSW 2031 Australia.

                E‐mail: n.black@ 123456unsw.edu.au

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7933-4833
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6398-0921
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9898-3049
                Article
                ADD14969 ADD-19-0499.R2
                10.1111/add.14969
                7496125
                32043675
                9d7d45d7-22b2-483b-95dc-b90bfdffd4a2
                © 2020 The Authors. Addiction published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society for the Study of Addiction

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 31 May 2019
                : 08 August 2019
                : 10 January 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 1, Pages: 11, Words: 4558
                Funding
                Funded by: Cancer Research UK , open-funder-registry 10.13039/501100000289;
                Award ID: C50862/A18446
                Categories
                Review
                Reviews
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                September 2020
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_JATSPMC version:5.9.0 mode:remove_FC converted:11.09.2020

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                behavior change techniques,comparator group,control group,meta‐analysis,meta‐regression,smoking cessation,systematic review

                Comments

                Comment on this article