@文章{信息:doi/10.2196/43242，作者=“郭宜强和陈玉玲和Dabbs, Annette DeVito和吴莹”，标题=“基于智能手机App的干预措施对帮助戒烟的有效性:系统评价和荟萃分析”，期刊=“J Med Internet Res”，年=“2023”，月=“4”，日=“20”，卷=“25”，页=“e43242”，关键词=“智能手机App;戒烟;荟萃分析;电子健康;移动健康;吸烟;应用程序;干预;有效性;电子; adult; pharmacotherapy", abstract="Background: Smoking is a leading cause of premature death globally. Quitting smoking reduces the risk of all-cause mortality by 11{\%}-34{\%}. Smartphone app--based smoking cessation (SASC) interventions have been developed and are widely used. However, the evidence for the effectiveness of smartphone-based interventions for smoking cessation is currently equivocal. Objective: The purpose of this study was to synthesize the evidence for the effectiveness of smartphone app--based interventions for smoking cessation. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness of smartphone interventions for smoking cessation based on the Cochrane methodology. An electronic literature search was performed using the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases to identify published papers in English or Chinese (there was no time limit regarding the publication date). The outcome was the smoking abstinence rate, which was either a 7-day point prevalence abstinence rate or a continuous abstinence rate. Results: A total of 9 randomized controlled trials involving 12,967 adults were selected for the final analysis. The selected studies from 6 countries (the United States, Spain, France, Switzerland, Canada, and Japan) were included in the meta-analysis between 2018 and 2022. Pooled effect sizes (across all follow-up time points) revealed no difference between the smartphone app group and the comparators (standard care, SMS text messaging intervention, web-based intervention, smoking cessation counseling, or apps as placebos without real function; odds ratio [OR] 1.25, 95{\%} CI 0.99-1.56, P=.06, I2=73.6{\%}). Based on the subanalyses, 6 trials comparing smartphone app interventions to comparator interventions reported no significant differences in effectiveness (OR 1.03, 95{\%} CI 0.85-1.26, P=.74, I2=57.1{\%}). However, the 3 trials that evaluated the combination of smartphone interventions combined with pharmacotherapy compared to pharmacotherapy alone found higher smoking abstinence rates in the combined intervention (OR 1.79, 95{\%} CI 1.38-2.33, P=.74, I2=7.4{\%}). All SASC interventions with higher levels of adherence were significantly more effective (OR 1.48, 95{\%} CI 1.20-1.84, P<.001, I2=24.5{\%}). Conclusions: This systematic review and meta-analysis did not support the effectiveness of delivering smartphone-based interventions alone to achieve higher smoking abstinence rates. However, the efficacy of smartphone-based interventions increased when combined with pharmacotherapy-based smoking cessation approaches. Trial Registration: PROSPERO CRD42021267615; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display{\_}record.php?RecordID=267615 ", issn="1438-8871", doi="10.2196/43242", url="//www.mybigtv.com/2023/1/e43242", url="https://doi.org/10.2196/43242", url="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37079352" }