↓ Skip to main content

Mobile phone-based interventions for smoking cessation

Overview of attention for article published in Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (98th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
2 blogs
policy
4 policy sources
twitter
128 tweeters
facebook
8 Facebook pages
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
230 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
3 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Mobile phone-based interventions for smoking cessation
Published in
Cochrane database of systematic reviews, April 2016
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd006611.pub4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robyn Whittaker, Hayden McRobbie, Chris Bullen, Anthony Rodgers, Yulong Gu

Abstract

Access to mobile phones continues to increase exponentially globally, outstripping access to fixed telephone lines, fixed computers and the Internet. Mobile phones are an appropriate and effective option for the delivery of smoking cessation support in some contexts. This review updates the evidence on the effectiveness of mobile phone-based smoking cessation interventions. To determine whether mobile phone-based smoking cessation interventions increase smoking cessation in people who smoke and want to quit. For the most recent update, we searched the Cochrane Tobacco Addiction Group Specialised Register in April 2015. We also searched the UK Clinical Research Network Portfolio for current projects in the UK, and the ClinicalTrials.gov register for ongoing or recently completed studies. We searched through the reference lists of identified studies and attempted to contact the authors of ongoing studies. We applied no restrictions on language or publication date. We included randomised or quasi-randomised trials. Participants were smokers of any age who wanted to quit. Studies were those examining any type of mobile phone-based intervention for smoking cessation. This included any intervention aimed at mobile phone users, based around delivery via mobile phone, and using any functions or applications that can be used or sent via a mobile phone. Review authors extracted information on risk of bias and methodological details using a standardised form. We considered participants who dropped out of the trials or were lost to follow-up to be smoking. We calculated risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for each included study. Meta-analysis of the included studies used the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect method. Where meta-analysis was not possible, we presented a narrative summary and descriptive statistics. This updated search identified 12 studies with six-month smoking cessation outcomes, including seven studies completed since the previous review. The interventions were predominantly text messaging-based, although several paired text messaging with in-person visits or initial assessments. Two studies gave pre-paid mobile phones to low-income human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive populations - one solely for phone counselling, the other also included text messaging. One study used text messages to link to video messages. Control programmes varied widely. Studies were pooled according to outcomes - some providing measures of continuous abstinence or repeated measures of point prevalence; others only providing 7-day point prevalence abstinence. All 12 studies pooled using their most rigorous 26-week measures of abstinence provided an RR of 1.67 (95% CI 1.46 to 1.90; I(2) = 59%). Six studies verified quitting biochemically at six months (RR 1.83; 95% CI 1.54 to 2.19). The current evidence supports a beneficial impact of mobile phone-based smoking cessation interventions on six-month cessation outcomes. While all studies were good quality, the fact that those studies with biochemical verification of quitting status demonstrated an even higher chance of quitting further supports the positive findings. However, it should be noted that most included studies were of text message interventions in high-income countries with good tobacco control policies. Therefore, caution should be taken in generalising these results outside of this type of intervention and context.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 128 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 3 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 3 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Postgraduate 1 33%
Unknown 2 67%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 1 33%
Unknown 2 67%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 117. 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 06 June 2019.
All research outputs
#133,940
of 13,633,853 outputs
Outputs from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#288
of 10,695 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#4,975
of 261,859 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cochrane database of systematic reviews
#10
of 182 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,633,853 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 10,695 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 21.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% 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 261,859 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 98% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 182 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.