MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063004372 · doi:10.1080/10810730.2012.665420

How Do Perceptions About Cessation Outcomes Moderate the Effectiveness of a Gain-Framed Smoking Cessation Telephone Counseling Intervention?

2012· article· en· W2063004372 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Health Communication · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institute on Drug AbuseNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism
KeywordsQuitlineSmoking cessationTelephone counselingMedicineRandomized controlled trialPsychologyClinical psychologyFamily medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The distinction between prevention and detection behaviors provides a useful guideline for appropriately framing health messages in terms of gains or losses. However, this guideline assumes that everyone perceives the outcomes associated with a behavior in a consistent manner, as prevention or detection. Individuals' perceptions of a behavior vary, and so the effects of framed messages may be optimized by considering individuals' perceptions rather than the prevention or detection function of the behavior. The authors tested this message-framing paradigm in a secondary analysis of data from a trial evaluating gain-framed smoking cessation counseling delivered through a state quitline (Toll et al., 2010 Toll , B. A. , Martino , S. , Latimer , A. , Salovey , P. , O'Malley , S. , Carlin-Menter , S., … Cummings , K. M. ( 2010 ). Randomized trial: Quitline specialist training in gain-framed vs standard-care messages for smoking cessation . Journal of the National Cancer Institute , 102 , 96 – 106 .[Crossref], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]). Smokers (N = 2,032) who called a state quitline received either gain-framed or standard care messages. Smokers' beliefs about the positive consequences of stopping smoking (outcome expectancies) were evaluated at baseline. Smoking status and self-efficacy were assessed at 3 months. Outcome expectancies moderated the framing effects among men but not among women. Men in the gain-framed counseling condition who had positive outcome expectancies were more likely to quit and had more confidence in their ability to quit or to remain abstinent than men who were uncertain of the positive outcome of smoking cessation. Among men, self-efficacy mediated the moderated framing effects of the intervention on quit status. These findings suggest that it may be useful to consider sex and individual differences in outcome expectancies when delivering gain-framed smoking cessation messages in the context of a state quitline.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.330 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it