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
