| Title |
Are digital interventions for smoking cessation in pregnancy effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Health Psychology Review, June 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1080/17437199.2018.1488602 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Sarah Ellen Griffiths, Joanne Parsons, Felix Naughton, Emily Anne Fulton, Ildiko Tombor, Katherine E Brown |
| Abstract |
Smoking in pregnancy remains a global public health issue due to foetal health risks and potential maternal complications. The aims of this systematic review and meta-analysis were to explore: (1) whether digital interventions for pregnancy smoking cessation are effective, (2) the impact of intervention platform on smoking cessation, (3) the associations between specific Behaviour Change Techniques (BCTs) delivered within interventions and smoking cessation, and (4) the association between the total number of BCTs delivered and smoking cessation. Systematic searches of nine databases resulted in the inclusion of 12 published articles (n = 2970). The primary meta-analysis produced a sample-weighted odds ratio (OR) of 1.44 (95% CI 1.04-2.00, p=0.03) in favour of digital interventions compared with comparison groups. Computer-based (OR=3.06, 95% CI 1.28 - 7.33) and text-message interventions (OR=1.59, 95% CI 1.07 - 2.38) were the most effective digital platform. Moderator analyses revealed seven BCTs associated with smoking cessation: information about antecedents; action planning; problem solving; goal setting (behaviour); review behaviour goals; social support (unspecified); and pros and cons. A meta-regression suggested that interventions using larger numbers of BCTs produced the greatest effects. This paper highlights the potential for digital interventions to improve rates of smoking cessation in pregnancy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 48 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 22 | 46% |
| United States | 4 | 8% |
| Australia | 2 | 4% |
| Israel | 1 | 2% |
| Puerto Rico | 1 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 2% |
| New Zealand | 1 | 2% |
| Ireland | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 15 | 31% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 24 | 50% |
| Scientists | 14 | 29% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 8 | 17% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 4% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 185 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 185 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 31 | 17% |
| Researcher | 27 | 15% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 23 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 23 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 5% |
| Other | 23 | 12% |
| Unknown | 49 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 35 | 19% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 30 | 16% |
| Psychology | 29 | 16% |
| Social Sciences | 8 | 4% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 24 | 13% |
| Unknown | 52 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 November 2023.
All research outputs
#1,038,612
of 26,017,215 outputs
Outputs from Health Psychology Review
#65
of 349 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#22,029
of 346,694 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health Psychology Review
#2
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,017,215 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 349 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 37.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 346,694 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.