MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2424498032 · doi:10.2196/resprot.5542

A Preliminary Exploration of Former Smokers Enrolled in an Internet Smoking Cessation Program

2016· article· en· W2424498032 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sarah Cha, Amy M. Cohn, Hoda Elmasry, Amanda L. Graham

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Research Protocols · 2016
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesNational Cancer Institute
Mots-clésSmoking cessationThe InternetMedicinePsychologyAbstinenceFamily medicinePsychiatryWorld Wide WebComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Internet interventions may have an important role to play in helping self-quitters maintain an initial period of abstinence. Little is known about the characteristics and utilization patterns of former smokers who use Internet cessation programs. OBJECTIVE: The overarching aim of this preliminary study was to establish the feasibility of a subsequent randomized trial of the effectiveness of Internet interventions in preventing relapse. Specifically, this study sought to determine the number of former smokers that register on a smoking cessation website, the characteristics of former smokers and their website utilization patterns, and potential predictors of sustained abstinence. METHODS: Participants were self-identified former smokers who registered on a free smoking cessation website. Recruitment occurred immediately following site registration. Participants completed Web-based baseline and 1-month follow-up assessments. Website utilization metrics were extracted at 1 month. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the full sample. Baseline differences were examined between recent quitters (≤7 days of abstinence at enrollment) and more established quitters (8+ days of abstinence at enrollment) using chi-square tests and t tests. Univariate logistic regression examined demographic, smoking, psychosocial characteristics, and website utilization metrics as predictors of 1-month abstinence. RESULTS: During the 10-month study period, 1141 former smokers were recruited to participate: 494 accepted the invitation, 395 were eligible, 377 provided informed consent, and 221 completed the baseline and fully enrolled (56% of those eligible). At 1 month, 55.7% (123/221) of participants completed the follow-up survey. Mean age was 44.25 years (SD 12.78) and the sample was primarily female (174/221, 78.7%), white (196/221, 88.7%), and had at least some college education (177/221, 80.1%). Slightly more than half of participants (123/221, 55.7%) reported quitting more than a week prior to website registration and 43.9% (97/221) had quit within 7 days of registration. The website features most likely to be used were an interactive Quit Date tool (166/221, 75.1%) and the Community (134/221, 60.6%). Univariate regression models showed that recent quitters, those with higher motivation to remain abstinent, and those who used cessation medication in the past year were more likely to use the Community. Older age, longer duration of abstinence at registration, better health status, and health care provider advice to quit were associated with 1-month abstinence. Website utilization metrics did not predict abstinence, though odds ratios suggested higher utilization was associated with greater odds of abstinence. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory study demonstrated the feasibility of recruiting former smokers to a research study and documented the uptake of an Internet cessation intervention among this group of self-quitters. Results also showed higher levels of website utilization and greater likelihood of community use among smokers early in their quit attempt compared to those with a longer period of abstinence at enrollment. Important areas for future research include identifying former smokers who may be more susceptible to relapse and determining which components of an Internet intervention are most helpful to prevent relapse in the early and later stages of a quit attempt.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Protocole · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,005
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,015

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0000,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,332
Tête enseignante GPT0,553
Écart entre enseignants0,221 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreProtocole

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2016
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Research Protocols→Même sujetSmoking Behavior and Cessation→Travaux en français237 207→