Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35436217›Full record

ArticleJMIR human factors2022

Process and Information Needs When Searching for and Selecting Apps for Smoking Cessation: Qualitative Study Using Contextual Inquiry.

Ylva Hendriks, Sebastiaan Peek, Maurits Kaptein, Inge Bongers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR human factors, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Ylva HendriksTranzo, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9662-5819
Sebastiaan PeekTranzo, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0105-4230
Maurits KapteinJheronimus Academy of Data Science, 's-Hertogenbosch, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6316-7524
Inge BongersTranzo, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2885-3537

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHundreds of apps are available to support people in their quest to quit smoking. It has been hypothesized that selecting an app from a sizable volume without any aid can be overwhelming and difficult. However, little is known about how people choose apps for smoking cessation and what exactly people want to know about an app before choosing to install it. Understanding the decision-making process may ultimately be helpful in creating tools to help people meaningfully select apps.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to obtain insights into the process of searching and selecting mobile apps for smoking cessation and map the range of actions and the accompanying reasons during the search, focusing on the information needs and experiences of those who aim to find an app.

methodsContextual inquiries were conducted with 10 Dutch adults wanting to quit smoking by using an app. During the inquiries, we observed people as they chose an app. In addition, 2 weeks later, there was a short semistructured follow-up interview over the phone. Through convenience and purposive sampling, we included participants differing in gender, age, and educational level. We used thematic analysis to analyze the transcribed interviews and leveraged a combination of video and audio recordings to understand what is involved in searching and selecting apps for smoking cessation.

resultsThe process of finding smoking cessation apps is comprehensive: participants explored, evaluated, and searched for information; imagined using functions; compared apps; assessed the trustworthiness of apps and information; and made several decisions while navigating the internet and app stores. During the search, the participants gained knowledge of apps and developed clearer ideas about their wishes and requirements. Confidence and trust in these apps to help quitting remained quite low or even decreased. Although the process was predominantly a positive experience, the whole process took time and energy and caused negative emotions such as frustration and disappointment for some participants. In addition, without the participants realizing it, errors in information processing occurred, which affected the choices they made. All participants chose an app with the explicit intention of using it. After 2 weeks, of the 10 participants, 6 had used the app, of whom only 1 extensively.

conclusionsFinding an app in the current app stores that contains functions and features expected to help in quitting smoking takes considerable time and energy, can be a negative experience, and is prone to errors in information processing that affect decision-making. Therefore, we advise the further development of decision aids, such as advanced filters, recommender systems and curated health app portals, and make a number of concrete recommendations for the design of such systems.

Indexed as

apps for smoking cessationcontextual inquirydecision-makingmHealth and eHealthmobile appsmobile app search and selectionmobile phone

Identifiers

PMID35436217
PMCPMC9052019

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.