CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 171Smoking Behavior and CessationSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesBehavioral Health and Interventions

Behavioural interventions for smoking cessation: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Mottillo, Salvatore, Filion, Kristian B., Bélisle, Patrick, Joseph, Lawrence, Gervais, André, O'Loughlin, Jennifer, Paradis, Gilles, Pihl, Robert +4 more·2009·European Heart Journal
DOI 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn552
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

AIMS: Widely varying estimates of treatment effects have been reported in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the efficacy of behavioural interventions for smoking cessation. Previous meta-analyses investigating behavioural interventions have important limitations and do not include recently published RCTs. We undertook a meta-analysis of RCTs to synthesize the treatment effects of four behavioural interventions, including minimal clinical intervention (brief advice from a healthcare worker), and intensive interventions, including individual, group, and telephone counselling. METHODS AND RESULTS: We searched the CDC Tobacco Information and Prevention, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Medline, and PsycINFO databases. We included only RCTs that reported biochemically validated smoking cessation outcomes at 6 and/or 12 months after the target quit date. Outcomes were aggregated using hierarchical Bayesian random-effects models. We identified 50 RCTs, which randomized n = 26 927 patients (minimal clinical intervention: 9 RCTs, n = 6456; individual counselling: 23 RCTs, n = 8646; group counselling: 12 RCTs, n = 3600; telephone counselling: 10 RCTs, n = 8225). The estimated mean treatment effects were minimal clinical intervention [odds ratio (OR) 1.50, 95% credible interval (CrI) 0.84-2.78], individual counselling (OR 1.49, 95% CrI 1.08-2.07), group counselling (OR 1.76, 95% CrI 1.11-2.93), and telephone counselling (OR 1.58, 95% CrI 1.15-2.29). CONCLUSION: Intensive behavioural interventions result in substantial increases in smoking abstinence compared with control. Although minimal clinical intervention may increase smoking abstinence, there is insufficient evidence to draw strong conclusions regarding its efficacy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/eurheartj/ehn552

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In a review of 50 randomised controlled trials and another review of 23 studies since January 2000, a group format for a behavioural intervention was not found to be significantly different from an individual format.

    “In a review of 50 randomised controlled trials 22 and another review of 23 studies since January 2000, 23 a group format for a behavioural intervention was not found to be significantly different from an individual format”

    From Evaluating Long-term Outcomes of NHS Stop Smoking Services (ELONS): a prospective cohort study (2015) · cites this paper as [22]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mottillo, S., Filion, K. B., Bélisle, P., Joseph, L., Gervais, A., O'Loughlin, J., Paradis, G., Pihl, R., Pilote, L., Rinfret, S., Tremblay, M., & Eisenberg, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Jewish General Hospital (CA)
  • McGill University Health Centre (CA)
  • McGill University (CA)
Corresponding author
Eisenberg, Mark J.
ORCID
Venue
European Heart Journal
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
2008-12-24
Volume
30
Issue
6
Pages
718-730
ISSN
  • 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
  • 1522-9645
DOI
10.1093/eurheartj/ehn552
OpenAlex
W2025716661
Cited by
171
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 14
FWCI
1.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • European Heart Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Canadian Institutes of Health Research
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
Keywords
smoking cessation, behavioral interventions, brief advice, individual counseling, group counseling, telephone counseling, smoking abstinence, treatment efficacy
MeSH terms
Smoking Prevention, Behavior Therapy, Female, Humans, Male, United States, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Smoking Cessation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review