Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29414907›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2018

Smokers' Views on Personal Carbon Monoxide Monitors, Associated Apps, and Their Use: An Interview and Think-Aloud Study.

Aleksandra Herbeć, Olga Perski, Lion Shahab, Robert West

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Remote Methods for Conducting Tobacco-Focused Clinical Trials.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020
    Review
  13. Decrease in Resting Heart Rate Measured Using Smartphone Apps to Verify Abstinence From Smoking: An Exploratory Study.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Why Are New Tobacco Control Interventions Needed?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2018
    Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

4 authors.

Aleksandra HerbećResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, UK. aaherbec@gmail.com.
Olga PerskiResearch Department of Clinical, Educational & Health Psychology, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, UK. olga.perski.14@ucl.ac.uk.
Lion ShahabResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, UK. lion.shahab@ucl.ac.uk.
Robert WestResearch Department of Behavioural Science and Health, University College London, London WC1E 7HB, UK. robert.west@ucl.ac.uk.

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/13/59/30649Cancer Research UK 22962Medical Research Council MR/K023195/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Smartphone-based personal carbon monoxide (CO) monitors and associated apps, or "CO Smartphone Systems" (CSSs) for short, could enable smokers to independently monitor their smoking and quitting. This study explored views and preferences regarding CSSs and their use among 16 adult, UK-based smokers. First, semi-structured interviews explored participants' expectations of CSSs. Secondly, a think-aloud study identified participants' reactions to a personal CO monitor and to existing or prototype apps. Framework Analysis identified five themes: (1) General views, needs, and motivation to use CSSs; (2) Views on the personal CO monitor; (3) Practicalities of CSS use; (4) Desired features in associated apps; and (5) Factors affecting preferences for CSSs and their use. Participants had high expectations of CSSs and their potential to increase motivation. Priority app features included: easy CO testing journeys, relevant and motivating feedback, and recording of contextual data. Appearance and usability of the personal CO monitor, and accuracy and relevance of CO testing were considered important for engagement. Participants differed in their motivation to use and preferences for CSSs features and use, which might have non-trivial impact on evaluation efforts. Personal CO monitors and associated apps may be attractive tools for smokers, but making CSSs easy to use and evaluating these among different groups of smokers may be challenging.

Indexed as

Mobile ApplicationsPatient PreferenceSmartphoneAdultCarbon MonoxideFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedMotivationQualitative ResearchSmokersSmokingSmoking CessationUnited KingdomCarbon Monoxidecarbon monoxideintervention developmentmHealth and eHealthqualitative studysmartphonesmoking cessation

Identifiers

PMID29414907
PMCPMC5858357

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.