35 research outputs found

    Processus cognitifs associés au trouble d'acquisition de la coordination

    Get PDF
    Background: Telephone services can provide information and support for smokers. Counselling may be provided proactively or offered reactively to callers to smoking cessation helplines. Objectives: To evaluate the effect of telephone support to help smokers quit, including proactive or reactive counselling, or the provision of other information to smokers calling a helpline. Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ICTRP for studies of telephone counselling, using search terms including 'hotlines' or 'quitline' or 'helpline'. Date of the most recent search: May 2018. Selection criteria: Randomised or quasi‐randomised controlled trials which offered proactive or reactive telephone counselling to smokers to assist smoking cessation. Data collection and analysis: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We pooled studies using a random‐effects model and assessed statistical heterogeneity amongst subgroups of clinically comparable studies using the I2 statistic. In trials including smokers who did not call a quitline, we used meta‐regression to investigate moderation of the effect of telephone counselling by the planned number of calls in the intervention, trial selection of participants that were motivated to quit, and the baseline support provided together with telephone counselling (either self‐help only, brief face‐to‐face intervention, pharmacotherapy, or financial incentives). Main results: We identified 104 trials including 111,653 participants that met the inclusion criteria. Participants were mostly adult smokers from the general population, but some studies included teenagers, pregnant women, and people with long‐term or mental health conditions. Most trials (58.7%) were at high risk of bias, while 30.8% were at unclear risk, and only 11.5% were at low risk of bias for all domains assessed. Most studies (100/104) assessed proactive telephone counselling, as opposed to reactive forms. Among trials including smokers who contacted helplines (32,484 participants), quit rates were higher for smokers receiving multiple sessions of proactive counselling (risk ratio (RR) 1.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19 to 1.61; 14 trials, 32,484 participants; I2 = 72%) compared with a control condition providing self‐help materials or brief counselling in a single call. Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate. In studies that recruited smokers who did not call a helpline, the provision of telephone counselling increased quit rates (RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.15 to 1.35; 65 trials, 41,233 participants; I2 = 52%). Due to the substantial unexplained heterogeneity between studies, we downgraded the certainty of the evidence to moderate. In subgroup analysis, we found no evidence that the effect of telephone counselling depended upon whether or not other interventions were provided (P = 0.21), no evidence that more intensive support was more effective than less intensive (P = 0.43), or that the effect of telephone support depended upon whether or not people were actively trying to quit smoking (P = 0.32). However, in meta‐regression, telephone counselling was associated with greater effectiveness when provided as an adjunct to self‐help written support (P Authors' conclusions: There is moderate‐certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling aids smokers who seek help from quitlines, and moderate‐certainty evidence that proactive telephone counselling increases quit rates in smokers in other settings. There is currently insufficient evidence to assess potential variations in effect from differences in the number of contacts, type or timing of telephone counselling, or when telephone counselling is provided as an adjunct to other smoking cessation therapies. Evidence was inconclusive on the effect of reactive telephone counselling, due to a limited number studies, which reflects the difficulty of studying this intervention.</br

    Alcoholic beverage preference and diabetes incidence across Europe the Consortium on Health and Ageing Network of Cohorts in Europe and the United States (CHANCES) project

    Get PDF
    It is unknown if wine, beer and spirit intake lead to a similar association with diabetes. We studied the association between alcoholic beverage preference and type 2 diabetes incidence in persons who reported to consume alcohol.Ten European cohort studies from the Consortium on Health and Ageing: Network of Cohorts in Europe and the United States were included, comprising participant data of 62 458 adults who reported alcohol consumption at baseline. Diabetes incidence was based on documented and/or self-reported diagnosis during follow-up. Preference was defined when ⩾70% of total alcohol consumed was either beer, wine or spirits. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were computed using Cox proportional hazard regression. Single-cohort HRs were pooled by random-effects meta-analysis.Beer, wine or spirit preference was not related to diabetes risk compared with having no preference. The pooled HRs were HR 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93, 1.20) for beer, HR 0.99 (95% CI 0.88, 1.11) for wine, and HR 1.19 (95% CI 0.97, 1.46) for spirit preference. Absolute wine intake, adjusted for total alcohol, was associated with a lower diabetes risk: pooled HR per 6 g/day was 0.96 (95% CI 0.93, 0.99). A spirit preference was related to a higher diabetes risk in those with a higher body mass index, in men and women separately, but not after excluding persons with prevalent diseases.This large individual-level meta-analysis among persons who reported alcohol consumption revealed that the preference for beer, wine, and spirits was similarly associated with diabetes incidence compared with having no preference

    Vitamin D exposure and Risk of Breast Cancer: a meta-analysis

    Get PDF
    The relationship between vitamin D and breast cancer is still controversial. The present meta-analysis examines the effects of the 25(OH)D, 1,25(OH)2D and vitamin D intake on breast cancer risk. For this purpose, a PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science-databases search was conducted including all papers published with the keywords "breast cancer" and "vitamin D" with at least one reported relative risk (RR) or odds ratio (OR). In total sixty eight studies published between 1998 and 2018 were analyzed. Information about type of study, hormonal receptors and menopausal status was retrieved. Pooled OR or RR were estimated by weighting individual OR/RR by the inverse of their variance Our study showed a protective effect between 25 (OH) D and breast cancer in both cohort studies (RR?=?0.85, 95%CI:0.74-0.98) and case-control studies (OR?=?0.65, 95%CI: 0.56-0.76). However, analyzing by menopausal status, the protective vitamin D - breast cancer association persisted only in the premenopausal group (OR?=?0.67, 95%CI: 0.49-0.92) when restricting the analysis to nested case-control studies. No significant association was found for vitamin D intake or 1,25(OH)2D. CONCLUSION: This systematic review suggests a protective relationship between circulating vitamin D (measured as 25(OH) D) and breast cancer development in premenopausal women

    Print-based self-help interventions for smoking cessation

    No full text
    Background Many smokers give up smoking on their own, but materials that provide a structured programme for smokers to follow may increase the number who quit successfully. Objectives The aims of this review were to determine the effectiveness of different forms of print‐based self‐help materials that provide a structured programme for smokers to follow, compared with no treatment and with other minimal contact strategies, and to determine the comparative effectiveness of different components and characteristics of print‐based self‐help, such as computer‐generated feedback, additional materials, tailoring of materials to individuals, and targeting of materials at specific groups. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The date of the most recent search was March 2018. Selection criteria We included randomised trials of smoking cessation with follow‐up of at least six months, where at least one arm tested print‐based materials providing self‐help compared with minimal print‐based self‐help (such as a short leaflet) or a lower‐intensity control. We defined 'self‐help' as structured programming for smokers trying to quit without intensive contact with a therapist. Data collection and analysis We extracted data in accordance with standard methodological procedures set out by Cochrane. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months' follow‐up in people smoking at baseline. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each study and biochemically validated rates when available. Where appropriate, we performed meta‐analysis using a random‐effects model. Main results We identified 75 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Many study reports did not include sufficient detail to allow judgement of risk of bias for some domains. We judged 30 studies (40%) to be at high risk of bias for one or more domains. Thirty‐five studies evaluated the effects of standard, non‐tailored self‐help materials. Eleven studies compared self‐help materials alone with no intervention and found a small effect in favour of the intervention (n = 13,241; risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.37; I² = 0%). We judged the evidence to be of moderate certainty in accordance with GRADE, downgraded for indirect relevance to populations in low‐ and middle‐income countries because evidence for this comparison came from studies conducted solely in high‐income countries and there is reason to believe the intervention might work differently in low‐ and middle‐income countries. This analysis excluded two studies by the same author team with strongly positive outcomes that were clear outliers and introduced significant heterogeneity. Six further studies of structured self‐help compared with brief leaflets did not show evidence of an effect of self‐help materials on smoking cessation (n = 7023; RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07; I² = 21%). We found evidence of benefit from standard self‐help materials when there was brief contact that did not include smoking cessation advice (4 studies; n = 2822; RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.88; I² = 0%), but not when self‐help was provided as an adjunct to face‐to‐face smoking cessation advice for all participants (11 studies; n = 5365; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.28; I² = 32%). Thirty‐two studies tested materials tailored for the characteristics of individual smokers, with controls receiving no materials, or stage‐matched or non‐tailored materials. Most of these studies used more than one mailing. Pooling studies that compared tailored self‐help with no self‐help, either on its own or compared with advice, or as an adjunct to advice, showed a benefit of providing tailored self‐help interventions (12 studies; n = 19,190; RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.49; I² = 0%) with little evidence of difference between subgroups (10 studies compared tailored with no materials, n = 14,359; RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.51; I² = 0%; two studies compared tailored materials with brief advice, n = 2992; RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.49; I² = 0%; and two studies evaluated tailored materials as an adjunct to brief advice, n = 1839; RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.53; I² = 10%). When studies compared tailored self‐help with non‐tailored self‐help, results favoured tailored interventions when the tailored interventions involved more mailings than the non‐tailored interventions (9 studies; n = 14,166; RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.68; I² = 0%), but not when the two conditions were contact‐matched (10 studies; n = 11,024; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.30; I² = 50%). We judged the evidence to be of moderate certainty in accordance with GRADE, downgraded for risk of bias. Five studies evaluated self‐help materials as an adjunct to nicotine replacement therapy; pooling three of these provided no evidence of additional benefit (n = 1769; RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.30; I² = 0%). Four studies evaluating additional written materials favoured the intervention, but the lower confidence interval crossed the line of no effect (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.58; I² = 73%). A small number of other studies did not detect benefit from using targeted materials, or find differences between different self‐help programmes. Authors' conclusions Moderate‐certainty evidence shows that when no other support is available, written self‐help materials help more people to stop smoking than no intervention. When people receive advice from a health professional or are using nicotine replacement therapy, there is no evidence that self‐help materials add to their effect. However, small benefits cannot be excluded. Moderate‐certainty evidence shows that self‐help materials that use data from participants to tailor the nature of the advice or support given are more effective than no intervention. However, when tailored self‐help materials, which typically involve repeated assessment and mailing, were compared with untailored materials delivered similarly, there was no evidence of benefit. Available evidence tested self‐help interventions in high‐income countries, where more intensive support is often available. Further research is needed to investigate effects of these interventions in low‐ and middle‐income countries, where more intensive support may not be available

    Print-based self-help interventions for smoking cessation

    No full text
    Background Many smokers give up smoking on their own, but materials that provide a structured programme for smokers to follow may increase the number who quit successfully. Objectives The aims of this review were to determine the effectiveness of different forms of print‐based self‐help materials that provide a structured programme for smokers to follow, compared with no treatment and with other minimal contact strategies, and to determine the comparative effectiveness of different components and characteristics of print‐based self‐help, such as computer‐generated feedback, additional materials, tailoring of materials to individuals, and targeting of materials at specific groups. Search methods We searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP). The date of the most recent search was March 2018. Selection criteria We included randomised trials of smoking cessation with follow‐up of at least six months, where at least one arm tested print‐based materials providing self‐help compared with minimal print‐based self‐help (such as a short leaflet) or a lower‐intensity control. We defined 'self‐help' as structured programming for smokers trying to quit without intensive contact with a therapist. Data collection and analysis We extracted data in accordance with standard methodological procedures set out by Cochrane. The main outcome measure was abstinence from smoking after at least six months' follow‐up in people smoking at baseline. We used the most rigorous definition of abstinence in each study and biochemically validated rates when available. Where appropriate, we performed meta‐analysis using a random‐effects model. Main results We identified 75 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Many study reports did not include sufficient detail to allow judgement of risk of bias for some domains. We judged 30 studies (40%) to be at high risk of bias for one or more domains. Thirty‐five studies evaluated the effects of standard, non‐tailored self‐help materials. Eleven studies compared self‐help materials alone with no intervention and found a small effect in favour of the intervention (n = 13,241; risk ratio (RR) 1.19, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.03 to 1.37; I² = 0%). We judged the evidence to be of moderate certainty in accordance with GRADE, downgraded for indirect relevance to populations in low‐ and middle‐income countries because evidence for this comparison came from studies conducted solely in high‐income countries and there is reason to believe the intervention might work differently in low‐ and middle‐income countries. This analysis excluded two studies by the same author team with strongly positive outcomes that were clear outliers and introduced significant heterogeneity. Six further studies of structured self‐help compared with brief leaflets did not show evidence of an effect of self‐help materials on smoking cessation (n = 7023; RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.07; I² = 21%). We found evidence of benefit from standard self‐help materials when there was brief contact that did not include smoking cessation advice (4 studies; n = 2822; RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.88; I² = 0%), but not when self‐help was provided as an adjunct to face‐to‐face smoking cessation advice for all participants (11 studies; n = 5365; RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.76 to 1.28; I² = 32%). Thirty‐two studies tested materials tailored for the characteristics of individual smokers, with controls receiving no materials, or stage‐matched or non‐tailored materials. Most of these studies used more than one mailing. Pooling studies that compared tailored self‐help with no self‐help, either on its own or compared with advice, or as an adjunct to advice, showed a benefit of providing tailored self‐help interventions (12 studies; n = 19,190; RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.49; I² = 0%) with little evidence of difference between subgroups (10 studies compared tailored with no materials, n = 14,359; RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.51; I² = 0%; two studies compared tailored materials with brief advice, n = 2992; RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.49; I² = 0%; and two studies evaluated tailored materials as an adjunct to brief advice, n = 1839; RR 1.72, 95% CI 1.17 to 2.53; I² = 10%). When studies compared tailored self‐help with non‐tailored self‐help, results favoured tailored interventions when the tailored interventions involved more mailings than the non‐tailored interventions (9 studies; n = 14,166; RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.20 to 1.68; I² = 0%), but not when the two conditions were contact‐matched (10 studies; n = 11,024; RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.30; I² = 50%). We judged the evidence to be of moderate certainty in accordance with GRADE, downgraded for risk of bias. Five studies evaluated self‐help materials as an adjunct to nicotine replacement therapy; pooling three of these provided no evidence of additional benefit (n = 1769; RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.30; I² = 0%). Four studies evaluating additional written materials favoured the intervention, but the lower confidence interval crossed the line of no effect (RR 1.20, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.58; I² = 73%). A small number of other studies did not detect benefit from using targeted materials, or find differences between different self‐help programmes. Authors' conclusions Moderate‐certainty evidence shows that when no other support is available, written self‐help materials help more people to stop smoking than no intervention. When people receive advice from a health professional or are using nicotine replacement therapy, there is no evidence that self‐help materials add to their effect. However, small benefits cannot be excluded. Moderate‐certainty evidence shows that self‐help materials that use data from participants to tailor the nature of the advice or support given are more effective than no intervention. However, when tailored self‐help materials, which typically involve repeated assessment and mailing, were compared with untailored materials delivered similarly, there was no evidence of benefit. Available evidence tested self‐help interventions in high‐income countries, where more intensive support is often available. Further research is needed to investigate effects of these interventions in low‐ and middle‐income countries, where more intensive support may not be available

    Behavioural interventions for smoking cessation: an overview and network meta‐analysis

    No full text
    This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows: The primary objectives are to summarise the evidence from Cochrane Reviews that assessed the effect of behavioural interventions designed to support smoking cessation attempts, and address the following two questions: How do modes of delivery, person delivering the intervention, and the behavioural and motivational components of behavioural interventions for smoking cessation compare with each other in achieving abstinence at follow‐up of six months or longer? Do the effects of behavioural interventions vary by other characteristics, including population, setting, and length of intervention? The secondary objective of this review is to summarise the availability and principal findings of economic evaluations of behavioural interventions for smoking cessation, in terms of comparative costs and cost‐effectiveness, in the form of a brief economic commentary

    Comparative efficacy and safety of the artemisinin derivatives compared to quinine for treating severe malaria in children and adults: a systematic update of literature and network meta-analysis

    No full text
    Background The artemisinin derivatives are the preferred antimalaria drugs for treating severe Plasmodium falciparum malaria. However, their clinical effectiveness compared to each other is unknown. Our objective, therefore, was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the artemisinin derivatives and quinine for treating severe P. falciparum malaria in children and adults using a network meta-analysis. Methods and findings Review protocol was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42020218190. We updated the search strategies of three Cochrane systematic reviews which included published and unpublished randomised control trials (RCTs) that have compared specific artemisinin derivatives to quinine in treating severe malaria. Search included CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, ISI Web of Science and trial registries up to February 2021. We screened studies, extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and quality of evidence in duplicate. Separate network meta-analyses in the frequentist framework, using a random effects model, with quinine as reference, were conducted for adults and children, and rankings were produced using p-scores to assess mortality, parasite clearance, coma recovery, fever clearance, neurological sequela and adverse events. Searches identified 818 citations, 33 RCTs were eligible. We pooled 7795 children and 3182 adults. The networks involved artesunate, artemether, rectal artemisinin, arteether and quinine. Compared to quinine, artesunate reduced mortality in children (risk ratio (RR), 0.76; 95%CI [0.65 to 0.89], moderate quality), adults (RR, 0.55; 95%CI [0.40 to 0.75], moderate quality) and in cerebral malaria (RR, 0.72; 95%CI [0.55 to 0.94], moderate quality). Compared to rectal artemisinin and intramuscular arteether, the efficacy and safety of parenteral artesunate, and intramuscular artemether in treating severe malaria are not clear. Rankings showed that none of the artemisinin drugs were consistently superior in all the outcomes assessed. Indirect evidence produced were of very low ratings due to suspected publication bias and imprecision. Conclusions Artesunate reduces mortality compared to quinine for both adults and children in Asia and Africa including cerebral malaria. The artemisinin derivatives remain the best treatment for severe malaria but their comparative clinical effectiveness is yet to be fully explored
    corecore