MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3109171227 · doi:10.2196/23677

Effects of a Text Messaging Smoking Cessation Intervention Among Online Help Seekers and Primary Health Care Visitors in Sweden: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial Using a Bayesian Group Sequential Design

2020· article· en· W3109171227 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marcus Bendtsen, Kristin Thomas, Catharina Linderoth, Preben Bendtsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFamiljen Kamprads StiftelseRegion Östergötland
KeywordsSmoking cessationPsychological interventionRandomized controlled trialMedicinePopulationFamily medicineIntervention (counseling)AbstinenceNursingPsychiatryEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: A steady decline of the smoking prevalence in Sweden has been recorded over the past decade; however, people still start and continue to smoke. There is a need for effective smoking cessation interventions that can scale to a national level and that are designed to reach individuals requiring smoking cessation support in the general population. OBJECTIVE: Previous randomized controlled trials of smoking cessation interventions among high school and university students in Sweden have found consistent evidence that text messaging interventions are effective in helping students quit smoking. However, there are no studies that investigate the effects of text messaging interventions in a more general population. The objective of this study is to estimate the effects of a text messaging intervention on individuals seeking help to quit online and individuals visiting primary health care units. METHODS: A 2-arm, parallel-group (1:1), randomized controlled trial will be employed to address the study objectives. The trial will follow a Bayesian group sequential design. Recruitment will be conducted using online advertisement (Google, Bing, and Facebook) and through health care professionals at primary health care units. All participants will receive treatment as usual; however, participants who are allocated to the intervention arm will also be given access to a 12-week text message smoking cessation intervention. Primary outcomes are 8-week prolonged abstinence and 4-week point prevalence, measured 3 months and 6 months postrandomization. Mediator variables (self-efficacy, importance, and know-how) will be measured to estimate causal mediation models. RESULTS: Recruitment commenced in September 2020 and will not exceed 24 months. This means that a complete dataset will be available at the latest towards the end of 2022. We expect to publish the findings from this trial by June 2023. CONCLUSIONS: This trial will further our understanding of the effects of text messaging interventions among a more general population than has previously been studied. We also aim to learn about differential effects between those who seek support online and those who are given facilitated support at primary health care units. Trial recruitment is limited to the Swedish population; however, a strength of this study is the pragmatic way in which participants are recruited. Through online advertisements, individuals are recruited in reaction to their own interest in seeking help to quit. At primary health care units, individuals who were not necessarily looking for smoking cessation support are given information about the trial. This closely mimics the way the intervention would be disseminated in a real-world setting and may therefore strengthen the argument of generalizability of findings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN 13455271; http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN13455271. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/23677.

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)0.046
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0460.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0140.008
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0040.003
Research integrity0.0140.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0640.013

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.362 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations19
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207