American Cancer Society's QuitLink: Randomized trial of Internet assistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eligible smokers (N = 6,451) visiting the American Cancer Society's Internet site offering cessation assistance were, with informed consent, randomized to receive access either to a static Internet site with quitting advice or to one of five interactive sites provided by cooperating research partners. Three-month follow-up surveys were conducted via online survey with E-mail prompts, or telephone calls, to assess quitting success; 54% of participants provided follow-up data. Results showed no significant overall difference in cessation rates among participants assigned to the interactive or static sites. We found large differences in the utilization of the five interactive sites. When sites were grouped by level of use, a significantly higher reported 3-month cessation rate was observed among participants assigned to the more highly utilized sites than among those assigned to the less utilized sites (12.2% vs. 10.2% of all randomized participants, 26.0% vs. 22.1% of followed participants). These findings show that interactive Internet sites yielding high levels of utilization can increase quitting success among smokers seeking assistance via the Internet.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.042 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".