Mobile Social Network–Based Smoking Cessation Intervention for Chinese Male Smokers: Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Around 2 million Chinese people, mostly men, die annually from tobacco-related diseases; yet, fewer than 8% of Chinese smokers ever receive any smoking cessation support. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to test the preliminary effectiveness and feasibility for a mobile social network (WeChat)-based smoking cessation intervention (SCAMPI program) among Chinese male smokers. METHODS: Chinese male smokers aged 25-44 years were recruited online from WeChat, the most widely used social media platform in China. Individuals using other smoking cessation interventions or who lacked capacity to provide online informed consent were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to intervention or control groups. Neither participants nor researchers were masked to assignment. The trial was fully online. All data were collected via WeChat. The intervention group received access to the full-version SCAMPI program, a Chinese-language smoking cessation program based on the Behaviour Change Wheel framework and relevant cessation guidelines. Specific intervention functions used in the program include: planning to help users make quitting plans, calculator to record quitting benefits, calendar to record progress, gamification to facilitate quitting, information about smoking harms, motivational messages to help users overcome urges, standardized tests for users to assess their levels of nicotine dependence and lung health, as well as a social platform to encourage social support between users. The control group had access to a static WeChat page of contacts for standard smoking cessation care. Both groups received incentive credit payments for participating. The primary outcome was 30-day biochemically verified smoking abstinence at 6 weeks after randomization, with missing data treated as not quitting. Secondary outcomes were other smoking status measures, reduction of cigarette consumption, study feasibility (recruitment and retention rate), and acceptability of and satisfaction with the program. RESULTS: The program recorded 5736 visitors over a 13-day recruitment period. We recruited 80 participants who were randomly allocated to two arms (n=40 per arm). At 6 weeks, 36 of 40 (90%) intervention participants and 35 of 40 (88%) control participants provided complete self-reported data on their daily smoking status via WeChat. Biochemically verified smoking abstinence at 6 weeks was determined for 10 of 40 (25%) intervention participants and 2 of 40 (5%) control participants (RR=5, 95% CI 1.2-21.4, P=.03). In the intervention group, the calculator function, motivational messages, and health tests were underused (less than once per week per users). Participants rated their satisfaction with the intervention program as 4.56 out of 5.00. CONCLUSIONS: Our program is a novel, accessible, and acceptable smoking cessation intervention for Chinese male smokers. A future trial with a greater sample size and longer follow-up will identify if it is as effective as these preliminary data suggest. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTR registry, ACTRN12618001089224; https://tinyurl.com/y536n7sx. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-18071.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".