Results were similarly imprecise, and also limited by risk of bias, when comparing hypnotherapy to intensive behavioural interventions (not matched for contact time) (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.82 I 2 = 0% 2 studies, 211 participants very low certainty evidence).
There was low certainty evidence, limited by imprecision and risk of bias, that showed no statistically significant difference between hypnotherapy and attention‐matched behavioural treatments (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.61 I 2 = 36% 6 studies, 957 participants). Pooling small groups of relatively comparable studies did not provide reliable evidence for a specific effect of hypnotherapy relative to controls. Most individual studies did not find statistically significant differences in quit rates after six months or longer, and studies that did detect differences typically had methodological limitations. Studies did not provide reliable evidence of a greater benefit from hypnotherapy compared with other interventions or no treatment for smoking cessation. We judged only one study to be at low risk of bias overall we judged 10 studies to be at high risk of bias and three at unclear risk. Studies were diverse and a single meta‐analysis was not possible. The studies included a total of 1926 participants. We included three new trials in this update, which brings the total to 14 included studies that compared hypnotherapy with 22 different control interventions.