Skip to main content
medRxiv
  • Home
  • About
  • Submit
  • ALERTS / RSS
Advanced Search

Informed decision making on the uptake of evidence-based smoking cessation assistance: A needs assessment among end users and experts to inform decision aid development

View ORCID ProfileThomas Gültzow, View ORCID ProfileEline Suzanne Smit, View ORCID ProfileRaesita Hudales, View ORCID ProfileCarmen D. Dirksen, View ORCID ProfileCiska Hoving
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.09.21255012
Thomas Gültzow
aCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Department of Health Promotion, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Thomas Gültzow
  • For correspondence: thomas.gultzow@maastrichtunivesity.nl
Eline Suzanne Smit
bDepartment of Communication Science, Amsterdam School of Communication Research/ASCoR, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Eline Suzanne Smit
Raesita Hudales
aCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Department of Health Promotion, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Raesita Hudales
Carmen D. Dirksen
cCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Carmen D. Dirksen
Ciska Hoving
aCare and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Department of Health Promotion, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Ciska Hoving
  • Abstract
  • Full Text
  • Info/History
  • Metrics
  • Data/Code
  • Preview PDF
Loading

Abstract

Introduction Evidence-based cessation assistance is known to increase cessation rates. Activating personal preferences as part of the decision for smoking cessation assistance tools could further improve tools’ effectiveness. Decision aids (DAs) help individuals to choose amongst the various options by taking these preferences into account and, therefore, could have a positive effect on cessation rates. To develop attractive and effective DAs, potential end users’ needs, and experts’ viewpoints should be considered during development processes. Therefore, the aim of this study was: (1) To explore smokers’ needs and viewpoints regarding a smoking cessation assistance DA, and (2) to obtain consensus among smoking cessation counsellors and scientific experts about the content and format of such a DA.

Materials and methods Data was gathered via two approaches applied across three studies: (1) 20 semi-structured interviews with potential end users, (2) two three-round Delphi studies with 61 smoking cessation counsellors and 44 scientific experts. Data from the interviews and the first round of the Delphi studies were analysed qualitatively using the Framework method, while data from the second and third round of the Delphi studies were analysed quantitatively using medians and interquartile ranges.

Results Potential end users reported to acquire information in different ways: Via own experiences, their social environment, and the media. Important characteristics to decide between tools also varied, however effectiveness and costs were commonly reported as the most important characteristics. The experts reached consensus on 38 (smoking cessation counsellors) and 40 (scientific experts) statements regarding important cessation assistance tools’ characteristics and their viewpoints on a smoking cessation assistance DA, e.g., that a tool should be appropriate for users’ level of addiction.

Discussion and conclusion Some clear trends emerged among the potential end users (especially regarding important characteristics). Experts also reached consensus among a number of statements. However, there was some variation in the needs and wishes among the (different) stakeholders. The combination of these studies highlights that a ‘one size fits all’ approach is not desirable. In the development of DAs, this heterogeneity should be taken into account, e.g., by enabling users to customize a DA based on their personal preferences while safeguarding essential elements.

Highlights

  • Potential end users’ needs for a smoking cessation DA vary greatly

  • However, tools’ effectiveness and costs were commonly named as important

  • Customizable elements within a DA could be used to deal with this heterogeneity

  • Conceptualizations (e.g., of effectiveness) may vary between stakeholders

  • Information should be provided to end users in an easily understandable manner

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This work was supported by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society (UM2015-7744).

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

Evaluation of this project by the Medical Ethics Committee METC Z (16-N-227) revealed that this project did not require medical ethics approval under the rules of the Medical Research Involving Human Subjects Act (WMO).

All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.

Yes

Footnotes

  • Declarations of interest: none

  • Funding: This work was supported by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society (UM2015-7744).

Data Availability

Due to the qualitative nature of the data reported in this article, we have decided not to make the data publicly available.

  • Abbreviations

    DA
    Decision Aid
    IPDAS
    International Patient Decision Aid Standards
    OSF
    Open Science Framework
  • Copyright 
    The copyright holder for this preprint is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY 4.0 International license.
    Back to top
    PreviousNext
    Posted April 13, 2021.
    Download PDF
    Data/Code
    Email

    Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

    NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

    Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
    Informed decision making on the uptake of evidence-based smoking cessation assistance: A needs assessment among end users and experts to inform decision aid development
    (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from medRxiv
    (Your Name) thought you would like to see this page from the medRxiv website.
    CAPTCHA
    This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
    Share
    Informed decision making on the uptake of evidence-based smoking cessation assistance: A needs assessment among end users and experts to inform decision aid development
    Thomas Gültzow, Eline Suzanne Smit, Raesita Hudales, Carmen D. Dirksen, Ciska Hoving
    medRxiv 2021.04.09.21255012; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.09.21255012
    Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
    Citation Tools
    Informed decision making on the uptake of evidence-based smoking cessation assistance: A needs assessment among end users and experts to inform decision aid development
    Thomas Gültzow, Eline Suzanne Smit, Raesita Hudales, Carmen D. Dirksen, Ciska Hoving
    medRxiv 2021.04.09.21255012; doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.04.09.21255012

    Citation Manager Formats

    • BibTeX
    • Bookends
    • EasyBib
    • EndNote (tagged)
    • EndNote 8 (xml)
    • Medlars
    • Mendeley
    • Papers
    • RefWorks Tagged
    • Ref Manager
    • RIS
    • Zotero
    • Tweet Widget
    • Facebook Like
    • Google Plus One

    Subject Area

    • Public and Global Health
    Subject Areas
    All Articles
    • Addiction Medicine (269)
    • Allergy and Immunology (551)
    • Anesthesia (135)
    • Cardiovascular Medicine (1751)
    • Dentistry and Oral Medicine (238)
    • Dermatology (172)
    • Emergency Medicine (312)
    • Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (656)
    • Epidemiology (10790)
    • Forensic Medicine (8)
    • Gastroenterology (586)
    • Genetic and Genomic Medicine (2939)
    • Geriatric Medicine (287)
    • Health Economics (532)
    • Health Informatics (1921)
    • Health Policy (834)
    • Health Systems and Quality Improvement (744)
    • Hematology (291)
    • HIV/AIDS (628)
    • Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (12509)
    • Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (687)
    • Medical Education (299)
    • Medical Ethics (86)
    • Nephrology (324)
    • Neurology (2789)
    • Nursing (151)
    • Nutrition (432)
    • Obstetrics and Gynecology (556)
    • Occupational and Environmental Health (597)
    • Oncology (1460)
    • Ophthalmology (443)
    • Orthopedics (172)
    • Otolaryngology (255)
    • Pain Medicine (190)
    • Palliative Medicine (56)
    • Pathology (380)
    • Pediatrics (865)
    • Pharmacology and Therapeutics (363)
    • Primary Care Research (336)
    • Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (2635)
    • Public and Global Health (5349)
    • Radiology and Imaging (1008)
    • Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (595)
    • Respiratory Medicine (725)
    • Rheumatology (329)
    • Sexual and Reproductive Health (289)
    • Sports Medicine (278)
    • Surgery (327)
    • Toxicology (47)
    • Transplantation (149)
    • Urology (125)