Mersha Amanual Getnet, Eftekhari Parivash, Bovill Michelle, Tollosa Daniel Nigusse, Gould Gillian Sandra
School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, Newcastle 2308, New South Wales, Australia
School of Medicine and Public Health, The University of Newcastle, University Drive, Callaghan, Newcastle 2308, New South Wales, Australia.
BMJ Open. 2020 Sep 21;10(9):e039775. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-039775.
Nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) has proven effective for smoking cessation in clinical trials, however it was found less effective in population-based studies, potentially due to inconsistent or incorrect use of NRT. The aim of this paper is to describe a systematic review protocol to evaluate level of adherence to NRT; the discrepancy of adherence to NRT in clinical and population-based studies and degree of association between level of adherence and success of smoking cessation.
Literature search will use five databases (Medline, Scopus, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO). Studies will be appraised for methodological quality using National Institutes of Health Quality Assessment Tool. To reduce heterogeneity, we will analyse clinical trials and population-based studies separately; pooled analyses will be done among studies that used similar measurements. Heterogeneity of studies will be assessed by Higgins' I statistical test. When studies are adequately homogeneous, results will be pooled using random-effects model with proportion and ORs with 95% CIs and p values for each outcome. We will explain sources of heterogeneity by subgroup analysis or sensitivity analysis. Funnel plots and Egger's regression asymmetry test with p<0.05 will be used as a cut-off point to affirm presence of statistically significant publication bias. Statistical analyses will be carried out using Stata V.16 software. Only studies reporting a valid strategy to control for reverse causality will be included.
This review will provide evidence to support the importance of adherence on rate of smoking cessation and level of adherence to NRT. The findings will be used to inform smoking cessation interventions, researchers and policymakers.
As a systematic literature review, this protocol does not require ethics approval. Research outcomes will be presented at relevant conferences and findings will be published in a relevant peer-reviewed journal.
CRD42020176749.
尼古丁替代疗法(NRT)在临床试验中已被证明对戒烟有效,然而在基于人群的研究中发现其效果较差,这可能是由于NRT使用不一致或不正确。本文的目的是描述一项系统评价方案,以评估NRT的依从性水平;临床研究和基于人群的研究中NRT依从性的差异以及依从性水平与戒烟成功率之间的关联程度。
文献检索将使用五个数据库(Medline、Scopus、Embase、CINAHL和PsycINFO)。将使用美国国立卫生研究院质量评估工具对研究的方法学质量进行评估。为减少异质性,我们将分别分析临床试验和基于人群的研究;对使用相似测量方法的研究进行汇总分析。将通过希金斯I统计检验评估研究的异质性。当研究充分同质时,将使用随机效应模型汇总结果,包括比例、带有95%置信区间的比值比以及每个结局的p值。我们将通过亚组分析或敏感性分析解释异质性来源。将使用漏斗图和p<0.05的埃格回归不对称检验作为判断是否存在统计学显著发表偏倚的临界点。将使用Stata V.16软件进行统计分析。仅纳入报告了控制反向因果关系有效策略的研究。
本综述将提供证据支持依从性对戒烟率和NRT依从性水平的重要性。研究结果将用于为戒烟干预措施、研究人员和政策制定者提供信息。
作为一项系统文献综述,本方案无需伦理批准。研究结果将在相关会议上展示,并在相关同行评审期刊上发表。
PROSPERO注册号:CRD42020176749。