Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27528530›Full record

ArticleTranslational behavioral medicine2016

Characterising smoking cessation smartphone applications in terms of behaviour change techniques, engagement and ease-of-use features.

Harveen Kaur Ubhi, Susan Michie, Daniel Kotz, Onno C P van Schayck, Abiram Selladurai, Robert West

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Translational behavioral medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

42 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Harveen Kaur UbhiCancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK. harveenk26@gmail.com.
Susan MichieCentre for Outcomes Research and Effectiveness, Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, London, UK.
Daniel KotzCancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
Onno C P van SchayckDepartment of Family Medicine, CAPHRI School for Public Health and Primary Care, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Abiram SelladuraiCancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.
Robert WestCancer Research UK Health Behaviour Research Centre, University College London, London, WC1E 6BT, UK.

Funding

Cancer Research UK 14135
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess whether or not behaviour change techniques (BCTs) as well as engagement and ease-of-use features used in smartphone applications (apps) to aid smoking cessation can be identified reliably. Apps were coded for presence of potentially effective BCTs, and engagement and ease-of-use features. Inter-rater reliability for this coding was assessed. Inter-rater agreement for identifying presence of potentially effective BCTs ranged from 66.8 to 95.1 % with 'prevalence and bias adjusted kappas' (PABAK) ranging from 0.35 to 0.90 (p < 0.001). The intra-class correlation coefficients between the two coders for scores denoting the proportions of (a) a set of engagement features and (b) a set of ease-of-use features, which were included, were 0.77 and 0.75, respectively (p < 0.001). Prevalence estimates for BCTs ranged from <10 % for medication advice to >50 % for rewarding abstinence. The average proportions of specified engagement and ease-of-use features included in the apps were 69 and 83 %, respectively. The study found that it is possible to identify potentially effective BCTs, and engagement and ease-of-use features in smoking cessation apps with fair to high inter-rater reliability.

Indexed as

Patient ParticipationBehavior TherapyHumansMobile ApplicationsPrevalenceSmartphoneSmoking CessationApplicationsAppsBCTsBehaviour change interventionsBehaviour change techniquesEase-of-useEngagementFeatureMobileSmartphoneSmokingSmoking cessationTaxonomy

Identifiers

PMID27528530
PMCPMC4987605

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.