Tessa Scheffers-van Schayck1,2, Ajla Mujcic3,4, Roy Otten5,6,7, Rutger Engels8, Marloes Kleinjan9,10. 1. Epidemiology and Research Support, Trimbos Institute - Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands, tscheffers@trimbos.nl. 2. Department of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands, tscheffers@trimbos.nl. 3. Drugs Monitoring and Policy, Trimbos Institute - Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 5. Research and Development, Pluryn, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Psychology, ASU REACH Institute, Arizona State University, Tempe, Arizona, USA. 7. Developmental Psychopathology, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 8. Executive Board, Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 9. Department of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 10. Youth, Trimbos Institute - Netherlands Institute of Mental Health and Addiction, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions tailored to parents of children aged 0-18 years. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out in PsycInfo, Embase, and PubMed in March 2020. A manual search of the reference lists of the included studies and systematic reviews related to the topic was also performed. Two authors independently screened the studies based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) effect studies with control groups that examine smoking cessation interventions tailored to parents of children (0-18 years), and (2) full-text original articles written in English and published between January 1990 and February 2020. In total, 18 studies were included in the analyses. The TiDieR checklist and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 were used to extract data and to assess the risk of bias. Consensus among authors was reached at each stage. RESULTS: Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. With a total number of 8,560 parents, the pooled relative risk was 1.62 (95% CI 1.38-1.90; p < 0.00001), showing a modest effect of the interventions on smoking cessation. Overall, 13.1% of the parents in the intervention conditions reported abstinence versus 8.4% of the parents in the control conditions. DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSION: Smoking cessation interventions tailored to parents are modestly effective. To increase the effectiveness and the impact of these interventions in terms of controlling tobacco use and public health, it is crucial for further research to explore how these interventions can be improved.
INTRODUCTION: A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the effectiveness of smoking cessation interventions tailored to parents of children aged 0-18 years. METHODS: A systematic search was carried out in PsycInfo, Embase, and PubMed in March 2020. A manual search of the reference lists of the included studies and systematic reviews related to the topic was also performed. Two authors independently screened the studies based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) effect studies with control groups that examine smoking cessation interventions tailored to parents of children (0-18 years), and (2) full-text original articles written in English and published between January 1990 and February 2020. In total, 18 studies were included in the analyses. The TiDieR checklist and the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool 2.0 were used to extract data and to assess the risk of bias. Consensus among authors was reached at each stage. RESULTS: Random-effects meta-analyses were performed. With a total number of 8,560 parents, the pooled relative risk was 1.62 (95% CI 1.38-1.90; p < 0.00001), showing a modest effect of the interventions on smoking cessation. Overall, 13.1% of the parents in the intervention conditions reported abstinence versus 8.4% of the parents in the control conditions. DISCUSSION/ CONCLUSION: Smoking cessation interventions tailored to parents are modestly effective. To increase the effectiveness and the impact of these interventions in terms of controlling tobacco use and public health, it is crucial for further research to explore how these interventions can be improved.
Authors: Sophia S C Chan; Tai Hing Lam; Farideh Salili; Gabriel M Leung; David C N Wong; Rick J Botelho; Shiu Lai Lo; Yu Lung Lau Journal: Appl Nurs Res Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 2.257
Authors: Martha S Tingen; Jeannette O Andrews; Janie Heath; Ashley E Turnmire; Jennifer L Waller; Frank A Treiber Journal: Am J Health Promot Date: 2013 Mar-Apr
Authors: Georg E Matt; Penelope J E Quintana; Hugo Destaillats; Lara A Gundel; Mohamad Sleiman; Brett C Singer; Peyton Jacob; Neal Benowitz; Jonathan P Winickoff; Virender Rehan; Prue Talbot; Suzaynn Schick; Jonathan Samet; Yinsheng Wang; Bo Hang; Manuela Martins-Green; James F Pankow; Melbourne F Hovell Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2011-05-31 Impact factor: 9.031