Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31667501›Full record

Trial reportNicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco2020

Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial of a Novel Smoking Cessation App Designed for Individuals With Co-Occurring Tobacco Use Disorder and Serious Mental Illness.

Roger Vilardaga, Javier Rizo, Paige E Palenski, Paolo Mannelli, Jason A Oliver, Francis J Mcclernon

Erratum issuedAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 32 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing 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

32 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. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Roger VilardagaDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Javier RizoDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Paige E PalenskiDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Paolo MannelliDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Jason A OliverDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Francis J McclernonDepartment of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Duke University, Durham, NC.

Funding

Nicotine Withdrawal and Reward Processing: Connecting Neurobiology toReal-World BehaviorK23DA042898 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA HLTH SCIENCES CTR · PI OLIVER, JASON ANTHONY · 2017 to 2021
$855k
Innovative Smartphone Application for Quitting Smoking among Seriously Mentally IIIR00DA037276 · NIDA · DUKE UNIVERSITY · PI VILARDAGA, ROGER · 2016 to 2018
$747k
NIDA NIH HHS K23 DA042898NIDA NIH HHS R00 DA037276
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionHigh rates of tobacco use among people with serious mental illness (SMI), along with their unique needs, suggest the importance of developing tailored smoking cessation interventions for this group. Previous early-phase work empirically validated the design and content of Learn to Quit, a theory-based app designed for this population.

methodsIn a pilot randomized controlled trial, we compared the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of Learn to Quit versus QuitGuide, an app designed for the general population. All participants received nicotine replacement therapy and technical assistance. Daily smokers with SMI (N = 62) participated in the trial with outcomes assessed at weeks 4, 8, 12, and 16.

resultsCompared to QuitGuide, Learn to Quit participants had similar number of days of app use (34 vs. 32, p = .754), but larger number of app interactions (335 vs. 205; p = .001), longer durations of app use (4.24 hrs. vs. 2.14 hrs; p = .044), and higher usability scores (85 vs. 79, p = .046). At week 16, Learn to Quit led to greater reductions in cigarettes per day (12.3 vs. 5.9 for QuitGuide; p = 0.10). Thirty-day point prevalence abstinence was verified in 12% of Learn to Quit participants versus 3% of QuitGuide participants (odds ratio = 3.86, confidence interval = 0.41 to 36, p = .239). Changes in psychiatric symptoms and adverse events were not clinically significant between conditions.

conclusionsThis pilot trial provides strong evidence of Learn to Quit's usability, feasibility, and safety. Preliminary evidence suggests the app may be efficacious. A randomized controlled efficacy trial is needed to test the app in a larger sample of smokers with SMI. IMPLICATIONS: This study suggests that the Learn to Quit app is a feasible approach to deliver smoking cessation treatment in patients with co-occurring tobacco use disorder and SMI. This means that, if found efficacious, this technology could be used to deploy smoking cessation treatment to larger segments of this population, hence improving public health. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial should be conducted to examine the efficacy of this digital intervention.

Indexed as

Behavior TherapyAdultFemaleHumansMaleMental DisordersMiddle AgedMobile ApplicationsNorth CarolinaPilot ProjectsSmokersSmoking CessationTelemedicineTobacco Use Cessation DevicesTobacco Use Disorder

Identifiers

PMID31667501
PMCPMC7443597

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.