MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320148309 · doi:10.5993/ajhb.28.3.4

Telephone Counseling for Population-based Smoking Cessation

2004· article· en· W2320148309 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia M. Smith, Roy Cameron, Paul McDonald, Beth Kawash, Cheryl Madill, Kathryn Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Health Behavior · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmoking cessationTelephone counselingAbstinenceMedicinePopulationHealth promotionService (business)Promotion (chess)Family medicinePhysical therapyDemographyPsychologyNursingPsychiatryEnvironmental healthPublic healthBusinessMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: To examine the options for use, efficiency, and effectiveness for structuring a population-based telephone smoking-cessation service. METHODS: Callers (n=632) to a 1-800 number were randomized in a 2 (50-minute counseling with 2/6 calls) x 2 (pamphlet/booklet) design with print only control. RESULTS: Six-month use of the service was 0.6% of adult smokers. Service promotion cost 31.02 dollars/person. Telephone counseling resulted in higher continued abstinence (5%) than did print only (1%), P<.05. Amount of print and calls did not increase cessation. Six calls resulted in lower completion rates than 2 (22% vs 56%, P<.05). CONCLUSIONS: For planning, consider 1% use, low-cost promotion, pamphlet, 50-minute initial counseling plus 2 follow-ups, and minimize call-attempts.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.328 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Health BehaviorSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207