MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6921306892 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.c.7124477

Feasibility of precision smoking treatment in a low-income community setting: results of a pilot randomized controlled trial in The Southern Community Cohort Study

2024· other· en· W6921306892 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2024
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRandomized controlled trialPsychological interventionCohortSmoking cessationPopulationDisadvantagedCohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The feasibility of precision smoking treatment in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities has not been studied. Methods Participants in the Southern Community Cohort Study who smoked daily were invited to join a pilot randomized controlled trial of three smoking cessation interventions: guideline-based care (GBC), GBC plus nicotine metabolism-informed care (MIC), and GBC plus counseling guided by a polygenic risk score (PRS) for lung cancer. Feasibility was assessed by rates of study enrollment, engagement, and retention, targeting > 70% for each. Using logistic regression, we also assessed whether feasibility varied by age, sex, race, income, education, and attitudes toward precision smoking treatment. Results Of 92 eligible individuals (79.3% Black; 68.2% with household income < $15,000), 67 (72.8%; 95% CI 63.0–80.9%) enrolled and were randomized. Of these, 58 (86.6%; 95% CI 76.4–92.8%) engaged with the intervention, and of these engaged participants, 43 (74.1%; 95% CI 61.6–83.7%) were retained at 6-month follow-up. Conditional on enrollment, older age was associated with lower engagement (OR 0.83, 95% CI 0.73–0.95, p = 0.008). Conditional on engagement, retention was significantly lower in the PRS arm than in the GBC arm (OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.03–1.00, p = 0.050). No other selection effects were observed. Conclusions Genetically informed precision smoking cessation interventions are feasible in socioeconomically disadvantaged communities, exhibiting high enrollment, engagement, and retention irrespective of race, sex, income, education, or attitudes toward precision smoking treatment. Future smoking cessation interventions in this population should take steps to engage older people and to sustain participation in interventions that include genetic risk counseling. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov No. NCT03521141, Registered 27 April 2018, https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03521141

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.275 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207