Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27826134›Full record

Trial reportJournal of medical Internet research2016

Impact of a Collective Intelligence Tailored Messaging System on Smoking Cessation: The Perspect Randomized Experiment.

Rajani Shankar Sadasivam, Erin M Borglund, Roy Adams, Benjamin M Marlin, Thomas K Houston

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of medical Internet research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02200432 (PERSPECT), which is not on this map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT02200432 nacompletednot on this map

PERSPECT: Patient Experience Recommender System for Persuasive Communication Tailoring

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Massachusetts, WorcesterRan2014 to 2015Enrolled972ConditionsSmoking CessationArmsPERSPeCT Recommender System
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Health Recommender Systems: Systematic Review.Journal of medical Internet research · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Health Recommender Systems Development, Usage, and Evaluation from 2010 to 2022: A Scoping Review.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  17. An Overview of Innovative Approaches to Support Timely and Agile Health Communication Research and Practice.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Review
  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

5 authors.

Rajani Shankar SadasivamDivision of Health Informatics and Implementation Science, Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical Scool, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-8406-6207
Erin M BorglundDivision of Health Informatics and Implementation Science, Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical Scool, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0003-0492-1803
Roy AdamsCollege of Information and Computer Sciences, University of Massaachusttes Amherst, Amherst, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-6859-3007
Benjamin M MarlinCollege of Information and Computer Sciences, University of Massaachusttes Amherst, Amherst, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2626-3410
Thomas K HoustonDivision of Health Informatics and Implementation Science, Quantitative Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Medical Scool, Worcester, MA, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-2909-4018

Funding

University of Massachusetts Center for Clinical Science and Translational SupplementUL1TR001453 · NCATS · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI LUZURIAGA, KATHERINE F · 2015 to 2024
$39.0M
University of Massachusetts Center for Clinical and Translational ScienceUL1TR000161 · NCATS · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI LUZURIAGA, KATHERINE F · 2012 to 2015
$11.0M
QUIT-PRIMO:Web-delivered Clinical Microsystem Intervention for Tobacco ControlR01CA129091 · NCI · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI HOUSTON, THOMAS K · 2008 to 2012
$2.9M
Developing Smokers for Smoker (S4S): A Collective Intelligence tailoring systemK07CA172677 · NCI · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI SADASIVAM, RAJANI · 2013 to 2017
$702k
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000161NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001453NCI NIH HHS K07 CA172677NCI NIH HHS R01 CA129091
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundOutside health care, content tailoring is driven algorithmically using machine learning compared to the rule-based approach used in current implementations of computer-tailored health communication (CTHC) systems. A special class of machine learning systems ("recommender systems") are used to select messages by combining the collective intelligence of their users (ie, the observed and inferred preferences of users as they interact with the system) and their user profiles. However, this approach has not been adequately tested for CTHC.

objectiveOur aim was to compare, in a randomized experiment, a standard, evidence-based, rule-based CTHC (standard CTHC) to a novel machine learning CTHC: Patient Experience Recommender System for Persuasive Communication Tailoring (PERSPeCT). We hypothesized that PERSPeCT will select messages of higher influence than our standard CTHC system. This standard CTHC was proven effective in motivating smoking cessation in a prior randomized trial of 900 smokers (OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.03-2.81).

methodsPERSPeCT is an innovative hybrid machine learning recommender system that selects and sends motivational messages using algorithms that learn from message ratings from 846 previous participants (explicit feedback), and the prior explicit ratings of each individual participant. Current smokers (N=120) aged 18 years or older, English speaking, with Internet access were eligible to participate. These smokers were randomized to receive either PERSPeCT (intervention, n=74) or standard CTHC tailored messages (n=46). The study was conducted between October 2014 and January 2015. By randomization, we compared daily message ratings (mean of smoker ratings each day). At 30 days, we assessed the intervention's perceived influence, 30-day cessation, and changes in readiness to quit from baseline.

resultsThe proportion of days when smokers agreed/strongly agreed (daily rating ≥4) that the messages influenced them to quit was significantly higher for PERSPeCT (73%, 23/30) than standard CTHC (44%, 14/30, P=.02). Among less educated smokers (n=49), this difference was even more pronounced for days strongly agree (intervention: 77%, 23/30; comparison: 23%, 7/30, P<.001). There was no significant difference in the frequency which PERSPeCT randomized smokers agreed or strongly agreed that the intervention influenced them to quit smoking (P=.07) and use nicotine replacement therapy (P=.09). Among those who completed follow-up, 36% (20/55) of PERSPeCT smokers and 32% (11/34) of the standard CTHC group stopped smoking for one day or longer (P=.70).

conclusionsCompared to standard CTHC with proven effectiveness, PERSPeCT outperformed in terms of influence ratings and resulted in similar cessation rates. CLINICALTRIAL: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02200432; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02200432 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/6lEJY1KEd).

Indexed as

Machine LearningEvidence-Based PracticeFemaleHealth CommunicationHumansInternetMaleMiddle AgedSmoking Cessationcomputer tailoringhealth communicationrecommender systemsmoking cessation

Identifiers

PMID27826134
PMCPMC5120237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

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.