MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399147110 · doi:10.2196/54817

Adding Virtual Reality Mindful Exposure Therapy to a Cancer Center’s Tobacco Treatment Offerings: Feasibility and Acceptability Single-Group Pilot Study

2024· article· en· W4399147110 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
R. Jackson, Ann Cao-Nasalga, Amy Chieng, Amy Pirkl, Annemarie D. Jagielo, Cindy Xu, Emilio Goldenhersch, Nicolas Rosencovich, Cristian Waitman, Judith J. Prochaska

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Formative Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer survivorship and care
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMoonshot Research and Development ProgramNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsCenter (category theory)CancerMedicinePsychologyPsychotherapistInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Smoking contributes to 1 in 3 cancer deaths. At the Stanford Cancer Center, tobacco cessation medication management and counseling are provided as a covered benefit. Patients charted as using tobacco are contacted by a tobacco treatment specialist and offered cessation services. As a novel addition, this study examined the acceptability of a virtual reality (VR) mindful exposure therapy app for quitting smoking called MindCotine. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the feasibility and acceptability of offering 6 weeks of MindCotine treatment as a part of Stanford's Tobacco Treatment Services for patients seen for cancer care. METHODS: As part of a single-group pilot study, the MindCotine VR program was offered to English- or Spanish-speaking patients interested in quitting smoking. Given the visual interface, epilepsy was a medical exclusion. Viewed from a smartphone with an attachable VR headset, MindCotine provides a digital environment with audiovisual content guiding mindfulness exercises (eg, breathing techniques, body awareness, and thought recognition), text-based coaching, and cognitive behavioral therapy-based self-reflections for quitting smoking. Interested patients providing informed consent were mailed a MindCotine headset and asked to use the app for 10+ minutes a day. At the end of 6 weeks, participants completed a feedback survey. RESULTS: Of the 357 patients reached by the tobacco treatment specialist, 62 (17.3%) were ineligible, 190 (53.2%) were not interested in tobacco treatment services, and 78 (21.8%) preferred other tobacco treatment services. Among the 105 eligible and interested in assistance with quitting, 27 (25.7%) were interested in MindCotine, of whom 20 completed the informed consent, 9 used the program, and 8 completed their end-of-treatment survey. Participants using MindCotine completed, on average, 13 (SD 20.2) program activities, 19 (SD 26) journal records, and 11 (SD 12.3) coaching engagements. Of the 9 participants who used MindCotine, 4 (44%) reported some dizziness with app use that resolved and 7 (78%) would recommend MindCotine to a friend. In total, 2 participants quit tobacco (22.2% reporting, 10% overall), 2 others reduced their smoking by 50% or more, and 2 quit for 24 hours and then relapsed. CONCLUSIONS: In a feasibility and acceptability pilot study of a novel VR tobacco treatment app offered to patients at a cancer center, 4 of 9 (44%) reporting and 4 of 20 (20%) overall substantially reduced or quit using tobacco after 6 weeks and most would recommend the app to others. Further testing on a larger sample is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05220254; https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05220254.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: Non-randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.181
GPT teacher head0.451
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Formative Research→Same topicCancer survivorship and care→French-language works237,207→