Does an interactive quit-smoking website have better evidence?

01

Clicking is not necessarily receiving tailored support

An article menu lets you choose what to read. A tailored programme changes material using answers; an interactive programme may respond to input or connect a person with support. The review included varied website, email and human-contact arrangements. A discussion with a counsellor is not the same intervention as an automated response, even if both appear inside a browser.

[2]

02

Three evidence dates answer different questions

The 2017 Cochrane review searched through August 2016. Adult tailored/interactive programmes showed benefit against non-active controls, but superiority over active cessation treatment was not established. Direct comparisons with non-tailored or non-interactive websites also did not establish a clear advantage. The label alone cannot explain the result.

WHO 2024 reports a newer commissioned synthesis: seven studies, 12,970 participants, internet interventions versus no/minimal intervention, long-term abstinence RR 1.11 (95% CI 0.90–1.36). The interval includes no difference; certainty was very low. That is not proof that every programme has no effect.

A 2025 network review searched through 10 September 2024 and found favourable estimates for personalised websites, with very low certainty for that category. Its primary outcome was seven-day point-prevalence abstinence at protocol-defined follow-ups, not one uniform six-month continuous endpoint. Direct and indirect network comparisons, different categories and assessment windows prevent treating it as a replacement number for WHO's estimate.

[1][2][3]

03

Inspect a sample response before giving private answers

Invented example: choosing ‘planning a work break’ opens either a generic article or a reply that explains its proposed task and why it was selected. This shows how the interface behaves, not which version produces abstinence. Ask to see a sample or demonstration without supplying smoking history.

Check who writes or responds, whether replies are automated, response hours if humans are involved, costs, language and how to stop messages. Find what data leave the browser, who receives them and how deletion works. ‘Personalised’ is not permission to collect more than necessary; do not put private notes into public forums or a URL.

04

A programme need not be the only support route

WHO says digital support can complement other available interventions and should not replace support a person wishes to use. A website without professional response should not be presented as a clinical service. For personal questions, contact a qualified local professional; NHS Better Health provides England service links, not a global directory. Page visits or completed modules are not smoking outcomes.

[1][4]

05

What to keep in mind

• Check what actually changes after an answer.
• Keep comparator, evidence date and assessment window attached to findings.
• Inspect privacy and access separately from efficacy.