ArticleAddictive behaviors reports2024
Acceptability of heart rate-based remote monitoring of smoking status.
Article in Addictive behaviors reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Introduction: Digital interventions present a scalable solution to overcome barriers to smoking cessation treatment, and changes in resting heart rate (HR) may offer a viable option for monitoring smoking status remotely. The goal of this study was to explore the acceptability of using smartphone cameras and activity trackers to measure heart rate for use in a smoking cessation intervention. Methods: Participants (N=410), most of whom identified as female (75.8 %) with mean age 38.3 years (SD 11.4), were recruited via the Smoke Free app. They rated the perceived comfort, convenience, and likelihood of using smartphone cameras and wrist-worn devices for HR monitoring as an objective measure of smoking abstinence. Wilcoxon signed-rank tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests assessed differences in acceptability across device types and whether the participant owned an activity tracker/smartwatch or smartphone. Results: Participants reported high levels of acceptability for both HR monitoring methods, with activity trackers/smartwatches rated more favorably in terms of comfort, convenience, and likelihood of use compared to smartphone cameras. Participants indicated a statistically significantly greater likelihood of using the activity tracker/smartwatch over the smartphone camera. Participants viewed the activity tracker/smartwatch as more acceptable than the smartphone camera (87.0% vs 50.0%). Conclusions: HR monitoring via smartphone cameras and wrist-worn devices was deemed acceptable among people interested in quitting smoking. Wrist-worn devices, in particular, were preferred, suggesting their potential as a scalable, user-friendly method for remotely monitoring smoking status. These findings support the need for further exploration and implementation of HR monitoring technology in smoking cessation research and interventions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.