MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4378746025 · doi:10.2196/43603

Black Smokers’ Preferences for Features of a Smoking Cessation App: Qualitative Study

2023· article· en· W4378746025 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chineme Enyioha, Larissa M Loufman, Mary E. Grewe, Crystal W. Cené, Saif Khairat, Adam O. Goldstein, Christine E. Kistler

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSmoking Behavior and Cessation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsmHealthPsychological interventionSmoking cessationMedicineFocus groupIntervention (counseling)Qualitative researchFamily medicinePsychologyNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mobile health (mHealth) interventions for smoking cessation have grown extensively over the last few years. Although these interventions improve cessation rates, studies of these interventions consistently lack sufficient Black smokers; hence knowledge of features that make mHealth interventions attractive to Black smokers is limited. Identifying features of mHealth interventions for smoking cessation preferred by Black smokers is critical to developing an intervention that they are likely to use. This may in turn address smoking cessation challenges and barriers to care, which may reduce smoking-related disparities that currently exist. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify features of mHealth interventions that appeal to Black smokers using an evidence-based app developed by the National Cancer Institute, QuitGuide, as a reference. METHODS: We recruited Black adult smokers from national web-based research panels with a focus on the Southeastern United States. Participants were asked to download and use QuitGuide for at least a week before participation in remote individual interviews. Participants gave their opinions about features of the QuitGuide app and other mHealth apps they may have used in the past and suggestions for future apps. RESULTS: Of the 18 participants, 78% (n=14) were women, with age ranging from 32 to 65 years. Themes within five major areas relevant for developing a future mHealth smoking cessation app emerged from the individual interviews: (1) content needs including health and financial benefits of quitting, testimonials from individuals who were successful in quitting, and strategies for quitting; (2) format needs such as images, ability to interact with and respond to elements within the app, and links to other helpful resources; (3) functionality including tracking of smoking behavior and symptoms, provision of tailored feedback and reminders to users, and an app that allows for personalization of functions; (4) social network, such as connecting with friends and family through the app, connecting with other users on social media, and connecting with a smoking cessation coach or therapist; and (5) the need for inclusivity for Black individuals, which may be accomplished through the inclusion of smoking-related information and health statistics specific for Black individuals, the inclusion of testimonials from Black celebrities who successfully quit, and the inclusion of cultural relevance in messages contained in the app. CONCLUSIONS: Certain features of mHealth interventions for smoking cessation were highly preferred by Black smokers based on their use of a preexisting mHealth app, QuitGuide. Some of these preferences are similar to those already identified by the general population, whereas preferences for increasing the inclusivity of the app are more specific to Black smokers. These findings can serve as the groundwork for a large-scale experiment to evaluate preferences with a larger sample size and can be applied in developing mHealth apps that Black smokers may be more likely to use.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.207
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations8
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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