Characterizing and Modeling Smoking Behavior Using Automatic Smoking Event Detection and Mobile Surveys in Naturalistic Environments: Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are 1.1 billion smokers worldwide, and each year, more than 8 million die prematurely because of cigarette smoking. More than half of current smokers make a serious quit every year. Nonetheless, 90% of unaided quitters relapse within the first 4 weeks of quitting due to the lack of limited access to cost-effective and efficient smoking cessation tools in their daily lives. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to enable quantified monitoring of ambulatory smoking behavior 24/7 in real life by using continuous and automatic measurement techniques and identifying and characterizing smoking patterns using longitudinal contextual signals. This work also intends to provide guidance and insights into the design and deployment of technology-enabled smoking cessation applications in naturalistic environments. METHODS: A 4-week observational study consisting of 46 smokers was conducted in both working and personal life environments. An electric lighter and a smartphone with an experimental app were used to track smoking events and acquire concurrent contextual signals. In addition, the app was used to prompt smoking-contingent ecological momentary assessment (EMA) surveys. The smoking rate was assessed based on the timestamps of smoking and linked statistically to demographics, time, and EMA surveys. A Poisson mixed-effects model to predict smoking rate in 1-hour windows was developed to assess the contribution of each predictor. RESULTS: In total, 8639 cigarettes and 1839 EMA surveys were tracked over 902 participant days. Most smokers were found to have an inaccurate and often biased estimate of their daily smoking rate compared with the measured smoking rate. Specifically, 74% (34/46) of the smokers made more than one (mean 4.7, SD 4.2 cigarettes per day) wrong estimate, and 70% (32/46) of the smokers overestimated it. On the basis of the timestamp of the tracked smoking events, smoking rates were visualized at different hours and were found to gradually increase and peak at 6 PM in the day. In addition, a 1- to 2-hour shift in smoking patterns was observed between weekdays and weekends. When moderate and heavy smokers were compared with light smokers, their ages (P<.05), Fagerström Test of Nicotine Dependence (P=.01), craving level (P<.001), enjoyment of cigarettes (P<.001), difficulty resisting smoking (P<.001), emotional valence (P<.001), and arousal (P<.001) were all found to be significantly different. In the Poisson mixed-effects model, the number of cigarettes smoked in a 1-hour time window was highly dependent on the smoking status of an individual (P<.001) and was explained by hour (P=.02) and age (P=.005). CONCLUSIONS: This study reported the high potential and challenges of using an electronic lighter for smoking annotation and smoking-triggered EMAs in an ambulant environment. These results also validate the techniques for smoking behavior monitoring and pave the way for the design and deployment of technology-enabled smoking cessation applications. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-028284.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".