<i>Actívatexto:</i> Feasibility and Acceptability of a Mobile Intervention That Promotes Smoking Cessation and Physical Activity among Latinos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to assess the feasibility and acceptability of a mobile intervention that promotes smoking cessation and physical activity among Latinos living in the United States. Twenty Latino adults who smoked and did not meet recommended levels of physical activity were recruited using community-based recruitment strategies. Participants received Actívatexto, a theory-based, culturally accommodated, 12-week text messaging intervention (available in English and Spanish) that promotes smoking cessation and physical activity. Actívatexto integrates four components: (i) a text messaging program, (ii) a wearable device, (iii) an online dashboard where the research team manages participants' incoming and outgoing data from both the text messaging program and wearable device, and (iv) nicotine replacement therapies (NRT). We assessed self-reported 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence at month 3, weekly minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity (MVPA), pharmacotherapy adherence, and satisfaction. At baseline, participants' mean age was 47.3 years old (SD 16.0), 55% of participants were female, and 60% indicated that Spanish was their language of preference. Seventy-five percent of participants smoked 1-10 cigarettes daily and 35% smoked their first cigarette within 5 minutes after waking up. At month 3, 14 participants (70%) self-reported 7-day point prevalence smoking abstinence (90% follow-up rate). Fitbit-assessed mean minutes of MVPA per week increased from 113 (SD 127; range: 0-399) at week 1 to 177 (SD 163; range: 0-513) at month 3 (P = 0.15). Sixteen participants (88.9%, 16/18) reported NRT use in the past 90 days. Most participants reported being extremely satisfied or satisfied with the intervention (88.9%, 16/18). SIGNIFICANCE: Actívatexto resulted in a noteworthy cessation rate at month 3 (70%), increased mean weekly minutes of MVPA, produced high use of NRT, and was well received by participants. Additional testing in a randomized clinical trial is warranted to assess the efficacy of the intervention.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".