Systematic reviews on tobacco control from Cochrane and the Community Guide: different methods, similar findings (original) (raw)
Related papers
Missing the forest (plot) for the trees? A critique of the systematic review in tobacco control
BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2010
Background: The systematic review (SR) lies at the core of evidence-based medicine. While it may appear that the SR provides a reliable summary of existing evidence, standards of SR conduct differ. The objective of this research was to examine systematic review (SR) methods used by the Cochrane Collaboration ("Cochrane") and the Task Force on Community Preventive Services ("the Guide") for evaluation of effectiveness of tobacco control interventions. Methods: We searched for all reviews of tobacco control interventions published by Cochrane (4 th quarter 2008) and the Guide. We recorded design rigor of included studies, data synthesis method, and setting. Results: About a third of the Cochrane reviews and two thirds of the Guide reviews of interventions in the community setting included uncontrolled trials. Most (74%) Cochrane reviews in the clinical setting, but few (15%) in the community setting, provided pooled estimates from RCTs. Cochrane often presented the community results narratively. The Guide did not use inferential statistical approaches to assessment of effectiveness. Conclusions: Policy makers should be aware that SR methods differ, even among leading producers of SRs and among settings studied. The traditional SR approach of using pooled estimates from RCTs is employed frequently for clinical but infrequently for community-based interventions. The common lack of effect size estimates and formal tests of significance limit the contribution of some reviews to evidence-based decision making. Careful exploration of data by subgroup, and appropriate use of random effects models, may assist researchers in overcoming obstacles to pooling data.
Bmc Med Res Methodol, 2010
Background: The systematic review (SR) lies at the core of evidence-based medicine. While it may appear that the SR provides a reliable summary of existing evidence, standards of SR conduct differ. The objective of this research was to examine systematic review (SR) methods used by the Cochrane Collaboration ("Cochrane") and the Task Force on Community Preventive Services ("the Guide") for evaluation of effectiveness of tobacco control interventions. Methods: We searched for all reviews of tobacco control interventions published by Cochrane (4 th quarter 2008) and the Guide. We recorded design rigor of included studies, data synthesis method, and setting. Results: About a third of the Cochrane reviews and two thirds of the Guide reviews of interventions in the community setting included uncontrolled trials. Most (74%) Cochrane reviews in the clinical setting, but few (15%) in the community setting, provided pooled estimates from RCTs. Cochrane often presented the community results narratively. The Guide did not use inferential statistical approaches to assessment of effectiveness. Conclusions: Policy makers should be aware that SR methods differ, even among leading producers of SRs and among settings studied. The traditional SR approach of using pooled estimates from RCTs is employed frequently for clinical but infrequently for community-based interventions. The common lack of effect size estimates and formal tests of significance limit the contribution of some reviews to evidence-based decision making. Careful exploration of data by subgroup, and appropriate use of random effects models, may assist researchers in overcoming obstacles to pooling data.
Overview of systematic reviews on the health-related effects of government tobacco control policies
BMC public health, 2015
Government interventions are critical to addressing the global tobacco epidemic, a major public health problem that continues to deepen. We systematically synthesize research evidence on the effectiveness of government tobacco control policies promoted by the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC), supporting the implementation of this international treaty on the tenth anniversary of it entering into force. An overview of systematic reviews was prepared through systematic searches of five electronic databases, published up to March 2014. Additional reviews were retrieved from monthly updates until August 2014, consultations with tobacco control experts and a targeted search for reviews on mass media interventions. Reviews were assessed according to predefined inclusion criteria, and ratings of methodological quality were either extracted from source databases or independently scored. Of 612 reviews retrieved, 45 reviews met the inclusion criteria and 14 more were identified ...
A scoping review protocol to map the research foci trends in tobacco control over the last decade
BMJ open, 2015
Tobacco dependence and smoke exposure have been global epidemics with health consequences recognised by the US Surgeon General since the 1960s and 1970s, respectively. During this period, a vast body of research evidence has emerged including many reviews of primary research studies targeting various tobacco control strategies. Published review studies synthesise primary evidence, providing a rich source for mapping the broad range of topics and research foci along with revealing areas of evidence deficits. In this paper, we outline our scoping review protocol to systematically review published review articles specific to tobacco control and primary prevention over the last 10 years. Using Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology as a guide, our scoping review of published reviews begins by searching several databases: PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Library, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycInfo and the Educational Resources In...
A framework for developing an evidence-based, comprehensive tobacco control program
2010
Background: Tobacco control is an area where the translation of evidence into policy would seem to be straightforward, given the wealth of epidemiological, behavioural and other types of research available. Yet, even here challenges exist. These include information overload, concealment of key (industry-funded) evidence, contextualization, assessment of population impact, and the changing nature of the threat.
Journal of Environmental and Public Health, 2012
Background. Policymakers need estimates of the impact of tobacco control (TC) policies to set priorities and targets for reducing tobacco use. We systematically reviewed the independent effects of TC policies on smoking behavior. Methods. We searched MEDLINE (through January 2012) and EMBASE and other databases through February 2009, looking for studies published after 1989 in any language that assessed the effects of each TC intervention on smoking prevalence, initiation, cessation, or price participation elasticity. Paired reviewers extracted data from studies that isolated the impact of a single TC intervention. Findings. We included 84 studies. The strength of evidence quantifying the independent effect on smoking prevalence was high for increasing tobacco prices and moderate for smoking bans in public places and antitobacco mass media campaigns. Limited direct evidence was available to quantify the effects of health warning labels and bans on advertising and sponsorship. Studies were too heterogeneous to pool effect estimates. Interpretations. We found evidence of an independent effect for several TC policies on smoking prevalence. However, we could not derive precise estimates of the effects across different settings because of variability in the characteristics of the intervention, level of policy enforcement, and underlying tobacco control environment.
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2001
Medical Subject Headings (MeSH): community health services, decision-making, evidencebased medicine, practice guidelines, preventive health services, public health practice, smoking cessation, meta-analysis, review literature, tobacco smoke pollution, tobacco use cessation (Am J Prev Med 2001;20(2S):67-87)
Systematic review of the link between tobacco and poverty
This study explores the link between tobacco use and poverty, as well as the broader relationship between income, tobacco use, and tobacco-related health consequences, using a meta-analysis of existing research literature. An estimated 5 million deaths are caused by tobacco each year, with this fi gure expected to reach more than 8 million per year by 2030 given current trends in tobacco use. The proportion of this burden borne by people living in low-and middle-income countries at that time is expected to be above 80%.
Global impact of tobacco control policies on smokeless tobacco use: a systematic review protocol
BMJ Open, 2020
IntroductionSmokeless tobacco (ST) was consumed by 356 million people globally in 2017. Recent evidence shows that ST consumption is responsible for an estimated 652 494 all-cause deaths across the globe annually. The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) was negotiated in 2003 and ratified in 2005 to implement effective tobacco control measures. While the policy measures enacted through various tobacco control laws have been effective in reducing the incidence and prevalence of smoking, the impact of ST-related policies (within WHO FCTC and beyond) on ST use is under-researched and not collated.Methods and analysisA systematic review will be conducted to collate all available ST-related policies implemented across various countries and assess their impact on ST use. The following databases will be searched: Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, EconLit, ISI Web of Science, Cochrane Library (CENTRAL), African Index ...