To determine the effectiveness of a Self-reported smoking status underestimating of treatment mobile phone text messaging effects); Biochemically verified abstinence on Author’s conclusion of SES impact smoking cessation programme random selection Text messaging can double quit rates and this effect was consistent across major External validity Intervention subgroups including income level Participants had to be in the Regular personalised text messages Intervention details contemplative stage of change providing smoking cessation advice, to be included; participants Free five text messages per day for support, distraction could use other smoking week prior to negotiated quit date cessation strategies and were and for four weeks after quit date. informed of quitline and SES variable Control group received free month of government subsidy for NRT at text messaging if participated until 26 Income baseline; participants had to weeks. own a mobile phone Study analysis Logistic regression Validity of author’s conclusion Details Method Results Comments Individual smoking cessation support Author, year Data sources General population impact Internal validity Ybarra 2013 RCT 40% of the participants in the intervention Feasibility sample small – arm had a verified quit status compared sample size so not sufficiently with 30% in the control arm at 3 months powered particularly for Age (years) Participant selection post quit. The observed difference was not subgroup results. 18-25 Purposefully targeted a diversity of statistically significant (OR = 1.62, 95% Imbalance in the minimum communities. Recruited nationally CI:0.82, 3.21). number of participants through online advertisements (e.g., Setting Participants in the intervention were intended for each arm Craigslist) between May 3, 2011 and National, USA significantly more likely to have quit at 4 within each subgroup (e.g., August 4, 2011. Eligibility criteria weeks post quit (39%) than those in the male heavy smokers). As a included the following: between control group (21%; aOR = 3.33, 95% CI: result, allocation concealment design the ages of 18–25, able to read and 1.48, 7.45); this was true also for 7-day was broken for the last eight write in English, owning cell phone, Pilot Quasi RCT
To determine the effectiveness of a mobile phone text messaging smoking cessation programme Intervention Regular personalised text messages providing smoking cessation advice, support, distraction SES variable Income Study analysis Logistic regression Self-reported smoking status Biochemically verified abstinence on random selection Intervention details Free five text messages per day for week prior to negotiated quit date and for four weeks after quit date. Control group received free month of text messaging if participated until 26 weeks. Author’s conclusion of SES impact Text messaging can double quit rates and this effect was consistent across major subgroups including income level underestimating of treatment effects); External validity Participants had to be in the contemplative stage of change to be included; participants could use other smoking cessation strategies and were informed of quitline and government subsidy for NRT at baseline; participants had to own a mobile phone Validity of author’s conclusion Details Method Results Comments Individual smoking cessation support Author, year Ybarra 2013 Age (years) 18-25 Setting National, USA design Pilot Quasi RCT Data sources RCT Participant selection Purposefully targeted a diversity of communities. Recruited nationally through online advertisements (e.g., Craigslist) between May 3, 2011 and August 4, 2011. Eligibility criteria included the following: between the ages of 18–25, able to read and write in English, owning cell phone, General population impact 40% of the participants in the intervention arm had a verified quit status compared with 30% in the control arm at 3 months post quit. The observed difference was not statistically significant (OR = 1.62, 95% CI:0.82, 3.21). Participants in the intervention were significantly more likely to have quit at 4 weeks post quit (39%) than those in the control group (21%; aOR = 3.33, 95% CI: 1.48, 7.45); this was true also for 7-day Internal validity Feasibility sample – small sample size so not sufficiently powered particularly for subgroup results. Imbalance in the minimum number of participants intended for each arm within each subgroup (e.g., male heavy smokers). As a result, allocation concealment was broken for the last eight
Youth-report-Web.docx