MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3142592833 · doi:10.2196/25030

Self-Efficacy and Motivation to Quit of Smokers Seeking to Quit: Quantitative Assessment of Smoking Cessation Mobile Apps

2021· article· en· W3142592833 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nikita B Rajani, Nikolaos Mastellos, Filippos T Filippidis

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersImperial College London
KeywordsSmoking cessationSelf-efficacyPsychological interventionQuit smokingMedicineClinical psychologyPsychologymHealthPsychiatrySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Decreasing trends in the number of individuals accessing face-to-face support are leaving a significant gap in the treatment options for smokers seeking to quit. Face-to-face behavioral support and other interventions attempt to target psychological factors such as the self-efficacy and motivation to quit of smokers, as these factors are associated with an increased likelihood of making quit attempts and successfully quitting. Although digital interventions, such as smoking cessation mobile apps, could provide a promising avenue to bridge the growing treatment gap, little is known about their impact on psychological factors that are vital for smoking cessation. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to better understand the possible impact of smoking cessation mobile apps on important factors for successful cessation, such as self-efficacy and motivation to quit. Our aim is to assess the self-efficacy and motivation to quit levels of smokers before and after the use of smoking cessation mobile apps. METHODS: Smokers seeking to quit were recruited to participate in a 4-week app-based study. After screening, eligible participants were asked to use a mobile app (Kwit or Quit Genius). The smoking self-efficacy questionnaire and the motivation to stop smoking scale were used to measure the self-efficacy and motivation to quit, respectively. Both were assessed at baseline (before app use), midstudy (2 weeks after app use), and end-study (4 weeks after app use). Paired sample two-tailed t tests were used to investigate whether differences in self-efficacy and motivation between study time points were statistically significant. Linear regression models investigated associations between change in self-efficacy and change in motivation to quit before and after app use with age, gender, and nicotine dependence. RESULTS: A total of 116 participants completed the study, with the majority being male (71/116, 61.2%), employed (76/116, 65.6%), single (77/116, 66.4%), and highly educated (87/116, 75.0%). A large proportion of participants had a low to moderate dependence on nicotine (107/116, 92.2%). A statistically significant increase of 5.09 points (95% CI 1.83-8.34) from 37.38 points at baseline in self-efficacy was found at the end of the study. Statistically significant increases were also found for the subcomponents of self-efficacy (intrinsic and extrinsic self-efficacies). Similarly, a statistically significant increase of 0.38 points (95% CI 0.06-0.70) from 5.94 points at baseline in motivation to quit was found at the end of the study. Gender, age, and nicotine dependence were not statistically significantly associated with changes in self-efficacy and motivation to quit. CONCLUSIONS: The assessed mobile apps positively impacted the self-efficacy and motivation to quit of smokers making quit attempts. This has important implications on the possible future use of digitalized interventions and how they could influence important psychological factors for quitting such as self-efficacy and motivation. However, further research is needed to assess whether digital interventions can supplement or replace traditional forms of therapy.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.434
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations56
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicSmoking Behavior and CessationFrench-language works237,207