MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184918151 · doi:10.2196/25390

Integrated Smoking Cessation for Smokers With Serious Mental Illness: Protocol for a Convergent Mixed Methods Implementation Evaluation Study

2021· article· en· W3184918151 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kristina Schnitzer, Melissa Culhane Maravić, Diana Arntz, Nathaniel L Phillips, Gladys N. Pachas, A. Eden Evins, Michael D. Fetters

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth Policy Implementation Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on Drug AbusePatient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute
KeywordsSmoking cessationProtocol (science)MedicineMental illnessMental healthPsychiatryPsychologyClinical psychologyAlternative medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking is associated with significant morbidity and premature mortality in individuals with serious mental illness. A 2-year pragmatic clinical trial (PCORI PCS-1504-30472) that enrolled 1100 individuals with serious mental illness in the greater Boston area was conducted to test 2 interventions for tobacco cessation for individuals with serious mental illness: (1) academic detailing, which delivers education to primary care providers and highlights first-line pharmacotherapy for smoking cessation, and (2) provision of community health worker support to smoker participants. Implementing and scaling this intervention in other settings will require the systematic identification of barriers and facilitators, as well as the identification of relevant subgroups, effective and unique components, and setting-specific factors. OBJECTIVE: This protocol outlines the proposed mixed methods evaluation of the pragmatic clinical trial to (1) identify barriers and facilitators to effective implementation of the interventions, (2) examine group differences among primary care physicians, and (3) identify barriers that stakeholders such as clinical, payor, and policy leaders would anticipate to impact the implementation of effective components of the intervention. METHODS: Qualitative interviews will be conducted with all study community health workers and selected smoker participants, primary care providers, and other stakeholders. Measures of performance and engagement will guide purposive sampling. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research will guide qualitative data collection and analysis in accordance with the following framework approach: (1) familiarization, (2) identifying a thematic framework, (3) indexing, (4) charting, and (5) mapping and interpretation. Joint display analyses will be constructed to analyze and draw conclusions across the quantitative and qualitative data. RESULTS: The 3-year cluster-randomized trial has concluded, and the analysis of primary outcomes is underway. Results from the pragmatic trial and this mixed methods implementation evaluation will be used to help disseminate, scale, and expand a systems intervention. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this mixed methods implementation evaluation will inform strategies for dissemination and solutions to potential barriers to the implementation of interventions from a smoking cessation trial for individuals with serious mental illness. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/25390.

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)0.129
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.129
Threshold uncertainty score0.680

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1290.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0050.004
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.007
Bibliometrics0.0050.006
Science and technology studies0.0060.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0060.005
Research integrity0.0050.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0940.013

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 head0.850
GPT teacher head0.825
Teacher spread0.025 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicHealth Policy Implementation ScienceFrench-language works237,207