Effectiveness of mobile applications to quit smoking: Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Introduction
Tobacco is the leading cause of preventable mortality. The use of mobile phones has grown exponentially, becoming a powerful tool to be used in health care.Methods
In order to assess the effectiveness of mobile phones to quit smoking, we have carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials evaluating interventions based on mobile applications for smartphones, that were not a smaller version of the same application, against other types of therapy. To address this, a bibliographic search was carried out in MEDLINE, EMBASE and COCHRANE LIBRARY. To obtain the combined effect, the relative risk and the 95% confidence interval were used. A heterogeneity and sensitivity analysis were also conducted.Results
A total of nine studies were identified, but five were excluded. Qualitative review was performed with four selected studies, but quantitative analysis was carried out for only three, given the impossibility of calculating the RR in one of the studies. After combining the results, an RR of 0.901 (95% CI: 0.57-1.423) was calculated comparing the effectiveness of mobile applications versus others type of interventions. This measure was robust, as shown by the sensitivity analysis.Conclusions
According to the results, it cannot be concluded that apps are effective for quitting tobacco. There are very few clinical trials published evaluating the effectiveness of mobile applications compared to other alternatives. Several clinical trials are still in progress, therefore their results have not been included in the present meta-analysis.
SUBMITTER: Cobos-Campos R
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7682489 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND: Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of premature deaths. Several pharmacological interventions now exist to aid smokers in cessation. These include Nicotine Replacement Therapy [NRT], bupropion, and varenicline. We aimed to assess their relative efficacy in smoking cessation by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis. METHODS: We searched 10 electronic medical databases (inception to Sept. 2006) and bibliographies of published reviews. We selected randomized controlled trials [RCTs] evaluating interventions for smoking cessation at 1 year, through chemical confirmation. Our primary endpoint was smoking cessation at 1 year. Secondary endpoints included short-term smoking cessation (approximately 3 months) and adverse events. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis and meta-regression. We compared treatment effects across interventions using head-to-head trials and when these did not exist, we calculated indirect comparisons. RESULTS: We identified 70 trials of NRT versus control at 1 year, Odds Ratio [OR] 1.71, 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 1.55-1.88, P =< 0.0001). This was consistent when examining all placebo-controlled trials (49 RCTs, OR 1.78, 95% CI, 1.60-1.99), NRT gum (OR 1.60, 95% CI, 1.37-1.86) or patch (OR 1.63, 95% CI, 1.41-1.89). NRT also reduced smoking at 3 months (OR 1.98, 95% CI, 1.77-2.21). Bupropion trials were superior to controls at 1 year (12 RCTs, OR1.56, 95% CI, 1.10-2.21, P = 0.01) and at 3 months (OR 2.13, 95% CI, 1.72-2.64). Two RCTs evaluated the superiority of bupropion versus NRT at 1 year (OR 1.14, 95% CI, 0.20-6.42). Varenicline was superior to placebo at 1 year (4 RCTs, OR 2.96, 95% CI, 2.12-4.12, P =< 0.0001) and also at approximately 3 months (OR 3.75, 95% CI, 2.65-5.30). Three RCTs evaluated the effectiveness of varenicline versus bupropion at 1 year (OR 1.58, 95% CI, 1.22-2.05) and at approximately 3 months (OR 1.61, 95% CI, 1.16-2.21). Using indirect comparisons, varenicline was superior to NRT when compared to placebo controls (OR 1.66, 95% CI 1.17-2.36, P = 0.004) or to all controls at 1 year (OR 1.73, 95% CI 1.22-2.45, P = 0.001). This was also the case for 3-month data. Adverse events were not systematically different across studies. CONCLUSION: NRT, bupropion and varenicline all provide therapeutic effects in assisting with smoking cessation. Direct and indirect comparisons identify a hierarchy of effectiveness.
| S-EPMC1764891 | biostudies-other
Project description:Mobile applications reach a high number of individuals at low costs. This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of mobile application-based interventions to increase physical activity (PA) and self-efficacy and to decrease sedentarism. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs investigating the effect of PA interventions using an app compared to no intervention or traditional interventions were included. Pooled effects using the standardized mean difference (SMD) or the weighted mean difference (WMD) were calculated and the overall quality of the evidence was rated using the GRADE. Eleven studies were included. In the short term, pooled estimates showed a small and positive effect in the number of steps favoring interventions using a mobile app when compared with no interventions (WMD = 1579.04, 95%CI 454.04 to 2703.38) and with traditional interventions (WMD = 665.96, 95%CI 167.92 to 1164.00). For self-efficacy and at follow-up, results favoured traditional interventions (WMD = -8.20, 95%CI -14.25 to -2.15). Non-significant results were found for the remaining comparisons. The quality of the evidence ranged from very low to low. There is very low to low quality evidence that interventions using mobile apps running on smartphones, when combined with traditional interventions, are superior to traditional interventions in the short term. Further high-quality studies are required.
| S-EPMC7177448 | biostudies-literature
Project description:CONTEXT:To provide a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis on smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit, a population that makes up approximately 32% of current smokers. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION:Twenty-two studies on pharmacological, behavioral, and combination smoking-cessation interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit (defined as those who reported they were not ready to quit at the time of the study) published between 2000 and 2017 were analyzed. The effectiveness (measured by the number needed to treat) and cost effectiveness (measured by costs per quit) of interventions were calculated. All data collection and analyses were performed in 2017. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS:Smoking interventions targeting smokers not ready to quit can be as effective as similar interventions for smokers ready to quit; however, costs of intervening on this group may be higher for some intervention types. The most cost-effective interventions identified for this group were those using varenicline and those using behavioral interventions. CONCLUSIONS:Updating clinical recommendations to provide cessation interventions for this group is recommended. Further research on development of cost-effective treatments and effective strategies for recruitment and outreach for this group are needed. Additional studies may allow for more nuanced comparisons of treatment types among this group.
| S-EPMC6055474 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRapid advancements in eHealth and mobile health (mHealth) technologies have driven researchers to design and evaluate numerous technology-based interventions to promote smoking cessation. The evolving nature of cessation interventions emphasizes a strong need for knowledge synthesis.ObjectiveThis systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize recent evidence from randomized controlled trials regarding the effectiveness of eHealth-based smoking cessation interventions in promoting abstinence and assess nonabstinence outcome indicators, such as cigarette consumption and user satisfaction, via narrative synthesis.MethodsWe searched for studies published in English between 2017 and June 30, 2022, in 4 databases: PubMed (including MEDLINE), PsycINFO, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Two independent reviewers performed study screening, data extraction, and quality assessment based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations) framework. We pooled comparable studies based on the population, follow-up time, intervention, and control characteristics. Two researchers performed an independent meta-analysis on smoking abstinence using the Sidik-Jonkman random-effects model and log risk ratio (RR) as the effect measurement. For studies not included in the meta-analysis, the outcomes were narratively synthesized.ResultsA total of 464 studies were identified through an initial database search after removing duplicates. Following screening and full-text assessments, we deemed 39 studies (n=37,341 participants) eligible for this review. Of these, 28 studies were shortlisted for meta-analysis. According to the meta-analysis, SMS or app text messaging can significantly increase both short-term (3 months) abstinence (log RR=0.50, 95% CI 0.25-0.75; I2=0.72%) and long-term (6 months) abstinence (log RR=0.77, 95% CI 0.49-1.04; I2=8.65%), relative to minimal cessation support. The frequency of texting did not significantly influence treatment outcomes. mHealth apps may significantly increase abstinence in the short term (log RR=0.76, 95% CI 0.09-1.42; I2=88.02%) but not in the long term (log RR=0.15, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.48; I2=80.06%), in contrast to less intensive cessation support. In addition, personalized or interactive interventions showed a moderate increase in cessation for both the short term (log RR=0.62, 95% CI 0.30-0.94; I2=66.50%) and long term (log RR=0.28, 95% CI 0.04-0.53; I2=73.42%). In contrast, studies without any personalized or interactive features had no significant impact. Finally, the treatment effect was similar between trials that used biochemically verified or self-reported abstinence. Among studies reporting outcomes besides abstinence (n=20), a total of 11 studies reported significantly improved nonabstinence outcomes in cigarette consumption (3/14, 21%) or user satisfaction (8/19, 42%).ConclusionsOur review of 39 randomized controlled trials found that recent eHealth interventions might promote smoking cessation, with mHealth being the dominant approach. Despite their success, the effectiveness of such interventions may diminish with time. The design of more personalized interventions could potentially benefit future studies.Trial registrationPROSPERO CRD42022347104; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=347104.
| S-EPMC10422176 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The burden of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) to patients and health services is steadily increasing. Self-management supported by mobile device applications could improve outcomes for people with COPD. Our aim was to synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of mobile health applications compared with usual care. A systematic review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials. Outcomes of interest included exacerbations, physical function, and Quality of Life (QoL). Where possible, outcome data were pooled for meta-analyses. Of 1709 citations returned, 13 were eligible trials. Number of exacerbations, quality of life, physical function, dyspnea, physical activity, and self-efficacy were reported. Evidence for effectiveness was inconsistent between studies, and the pooled effect size for physical function and QoL was not significant. There was notable variation in outcome measures used across trials. Developing a standardized outcome-reporting framework for digital health interventions in COPD self-management may help standardize future research.
| S-EPMC7113264 | biostudies-literature
Project description:INTRODUCTION:The number of patients taking oral chemotherapy is increasing around the world. It is essential to maximise the adherence to oral chemotherapy to improve the overall survival and life expectancy of the patients. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to evaluate the effectiveness of mobile applications in improving the adherence to oral chemotherapy and adjuvant hormonal therapy in cancer survivors. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, clinicaltrials.gov, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials will be searched for randomised or quasi-experimental studies published between January 2009 and July 2019. This systematic review and meta-analysis will include studies investigating the use of mobile applications by cancer survivors to aid adherence to oral chemotherapy and adjuvant hormonal therapy. Patient education, reminder tools, calendars, pillboxes and electronic reminders will not be evaluated. The primary outcome will be the improvement in adherence to anticancer drugs. The secondary outcomes will be an improvement in the overall survival and life expectancy, improved quality of life and control of cancer-related symptoms. Three independent reviewers will select the studies and extract data from the original publications. The risk-of-bias will be assessed using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. Data synthesis will be performed using the Review Manager software (RevMan V.5.2.3). To assess heterogeneity, we will compute the I2 statistics. Additionally, a quantitative synthesis will be performed if the included studies are sufficiently homogenous. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:This study will be a review of the published data, and thus, ethical approval is not required. Findings of this systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER:CRD42018102172.
| S-EPMC6858102 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionConversational agents (CAs; computer programs that use artificial intelligence to simulate a conversation with users through natural language) have evolved considerably in recent years to support healthcare by providing autonomous, interactive, and accessible services, making them potentially useful for supporting smoking cessation. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide an overarching evaluation of their effectiveness and acceptability to inform future development and adoption.Aims and methodsPsycInfo, Web of Science, ACM Digital Library, IEEE Xplore, Medline, EMBASE, Communication and Mass Media Complete, and CINAHL Complete were searched for studies examining the use of CAs for smoking cessation. Data from eligible studies were extracted and used for random-effects meta-analyses.ResultsThe search yielded 1245 publications with 13 studies eligible for systematic review (total N = 8236) and six studies for random-effects meta-analyses. All studies reported positive effects on cessation-related outcomes. A meta-analysis with randomized controlled trials reporting on abstinence yielded a sample-weighted odds ratio of 1.66 (95% CI = 1.33% to 2.07%, p < .001), favoring CAs over comparison groups. A narrative synthesis of all included studies showed overall high acceptability, while some barriers were identified from user feedback. Overall, included studies were diverse in design with mixed quality, and evidence of publication bias was identified. A lack of theoretical foundations was noted, as well as a clear need for relational communication in future designs.ConclusionsThe effectiveness and acceptability of CAs for smoking cessation are promising. However, standardization of reporting and designing of the agents is warranted for a more comprehensive evaluation.ImplicationsThis is the first systematic review to provide insight into the use of CAs to support smoking cessation. Our findings demonstrated initial promise in the effectiveness and user acceptability of these agents. We also identified a lack of theoretical and methodological limitations to improve future study design and intervention delivery.
| S-EPMC10256885 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOnline and mobile telephone applications ('apps') have the potential to improve the scalability of effective interventions for suicidal ideation and self-harm. The aim of this review was therefore to investigate the effectiveness of digital interventions for the self-management of suicidal ideation or self-harm.MethodsSeven databases (Applied Science & Technology; CENTRAL; CRESP; Embase; Global Health; PsycARTICLES; PsycINFO; Medline) were searched to 31 March, 2017. Studies that examined the effectiveness of digital interventions for suicidal ideation and/or self-harm, or which reported outcome data for suicidal ideation and/or self-harm, within a randomised controlled trial (RCT), pseudo-RCT, or observational pre-test/post-test design were included in the review.ResultsFourteen non-overlapping studies were included, reporting data from a total of 3,356 participants. Overall, digital interventions were associated with reductions for suicidal ideation scores at post-intervention. There was no evidence of a treatment effect for self-harm or attempted suicide.ConclusionsMost studies were biased in relation to at least one aspect of study design, and particularly the domains of participant, clinical personnel, and outcome assessor blinding. Performance and detection bias therefore cannot be ruled out. Digital interventions for suicidal ideation and self-harm may be more effective than waitlist control. It is unclear whether these reductions would be clinically meaningful at present. Further evidence, particularly with regards to the potential mechanisms of action of these interventions, as well as safety, is required before these interventions could recommended.
| S-EPMC5558658 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveEffective strategies are needed to encourage smoking cessation for smokers without an intention to quit. We systematically reviewed the literature to investigate whether smoking reduction therapy can increase the long-term cessation rates of smokers without an intention to quit.MethodsPubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the effect of smoking reduction therapy on long-term smoking cessation in smokers without an intention to quit. The primary outcome was the cessation rate at the longest follow-up period. A random effects model was used to calculate pooled relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsFourteen trials with a total of 7981 smokers were included. The pooled analysis suggested that reduction support plus medication significantly increased the long-term cessation of smokers without an intention to quit compared to reduction support plus placebo (RR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.44-2.7; I(2), 52%) or no intervention (RR, 1.93; 95% CI, 1.41-2.64; I(2), 46%). In a subgroup of smokers who received varenicline or nicotine replacement therapy (NRT), the differences were also statistically significant. This suggests the safety of using NRT. The percentage of smokers with serious adverse events who discontinued because of these events in the non-NRT group was slightly significantly different than in the control group. Insufficient evidence is available to test the efficacy of reduction behavioural support in promoting long-term cessation among this population.ConclusionsThe present meta-analysis indicated the efficacy of NRT- and varenicline-assisted reduction to achieve complete cessation among smokers without an intention to quit. Further evidence is needed to assess the efficacy and safety of reduction behavioural support and bupropion.
| S-EPMC4586609 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chronic pain is one of the major causes of disability in the general population. Even though there are effective treatment options available for reducing symptoms, these treatments often do not have consistent lasting effects. As the usage of mobile devices has increased enormously during the last few years, mobile application-based treatment options are widespread. Such app-based programs are not yet empirically proven but might enable patients to become more independent in their pain management in order to prevent relapse. The aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize the literature on mobile application-based interventions for chronic pain patients. Therefore, three electronic bibliographic databases, PubMed, PsycINFO, and Web of Science, were searched for studies that investigated the effectiveness of mobile application-based intervention for chronic pain on pain intensity. The final sample comprised twenty-two studies, with a total of 4679 individuals. Twelve of these twenty-two studies used a randomized control trial (RCT) design, while ten studies only used an observational design. For all twenty-two studies, a small but significant effect (d = -0.40) was found when compared to baseline measures or control groups. The results suggest that apps-based treatment can be helpful in reducing pain, especially in the long-term.
| S-EPMC7694405 | biostudies-literature