MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3200509968 · doi:10.2196/25883

Evaluating Outcomes of a Social Media–Based Peer and Clinician-Supported Smoking Cessation Program in Preventing Smoking Relapse: Mixed Methods Case Study

2021· article· en· W3200509968 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Naohi Isse, Yuki Tachibana, Makiko Kinoshita, Michael D. Fetters

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSmoking cessationSocial mediaMedicineRelapse preventionSocial supportPsychologyFamily medicineClinical psychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Smoking relapse prevention after completion of a smoking cessation program is highly germane to reducing smoking rates. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 1-year outcomes of a social media-based and peer and clinician-supported smoking cessation program on Facebook and examine communication patterns that could support smoking cessation and identify risk of relapse. METHODS: We used a mixed methods case study evaluation approach featuring a single-case holistic design. We recruited volunteers who signed up after successful completion of a 12-week clinical smoking cessation program in a general medicine department in Japan. Participants contemporaneously accessed a closed Facebook page, and we analyzed their posts including text and emoticons. We used joint display analysis, which involved iterative structuring and restructuring construct-specific tables with both types of data to find the most effective approach for integrating the quantitative results with the qualitative results of content analysis. RESULTS: One successful participant and 2 relapsed participants were analyzed to explore the specific patterns of postings prior to relapse. Decisive comments about quitting smoking were common among participants, but encouraging messages for peers were more common from the successful participant. Comments seeking social support and reassurance were warning signs of relapse. Conflicted comments also may be a warning sign of relapse risk. CONCLUSIONS: These findings based on a mixed methods case study of a social media platform supporting smoking cessation could be used to guide messaging in other online social networking service communities after a smoking cessation program to help reduce smoking relapse. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000031172; https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000035595.

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)0.020
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.020
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0200.020
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.281
GPT teacher head0.596
Teacher spread0.316 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicSmoking Behavior and Cessation→French-language works237,207→