Feasibility of implementing a novel behavioural smoking cessation intervention amongst human immunodeficiency virus-infected smokers in a resource-limited setting: A single-arm pilot trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tobacco use is prevalent amongst individuals infected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). In resource-constrained settings, pharmacological smoking cessation interventions are unfeasible because of their high cost. There is a need to develop and evaluate behavioural interventions to address the unique challenges of tobacco use in the HIV-infected populations in these settings.The authors aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of the Behavioural Activation/Problem Solving for Smoking Cessation (BAPS-SC) intervention programme to determine whether it should be tested in an adequately powered randomised controlled trial.The authors merged behavioural activation therapy (BAT) with the principles of problem-solving therapy to create a novel five-session counselling model to address the unique challenges of tobacco cessation amongst those infected with HIV. Feasibility measures included the rate of enrolment amongst those eligible and the retention rate and descriptive analysis of intervention acceptability. The authors' secondary outcome was 7-day point smoking prevalence abstinence, confirmed with breath carbon monoxide.A total of 128 individuals were screened over 8 weeks with 50 deemed eligible and 40 enrolled (80%). Retention at week 12 was 53% (21/40). The 7-day point prevalence abstinence, co-confirmed, at week 12 was 37.5% (15/40). All respondents indicated that they would recommend BAPS-SC to other smokers who want to quit, and would be willing to participate in the programme again up to the point of exit if they did not stop smoking.A full-scale randomised control trial comparing BAPS-SC with usual practice is warranted to evaluate the efficacy of this novel intervention in these settings.
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 | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".