Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Digitalizing Specialist Smoking Cessation Support in Pregnancy: Views of Pregnant Smokers

      research-article
      , PhD , , PhD, , PhD, , MD, , PhD, , PhD
      Nicotine & Tobacco Research
      Oxford University Press

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Unsupported attempts to quit smoking during pregnancy have a low success rate. Chances of quitting successfully are higher with an interpersonal treatment program but there is low uptake of this in the United Kingdom. Delivering a pregnancy-specific treatment program digitally may provide an alternative treatment route. This study explored pregnant smokers’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators to using digital cessation support, along with identifying modes of delivery and engagement enhancers.

          Aims and Methods

          Semi-structured interviews were carried out with an ethnically and socioeconomically diverse sample of 25 participants with recent experience of attempting to quit smoking in pregnancy, aged 20–40, from the United Kingdom. An inductive thematic analysis approach was used.

          Results

          Digital smoking cessation support, particularly a smartphone app, for pregnancy was felt to overcome many barriers to engaging with interpersonal support, being viewed as more convenient, and nonjudgmental, providing better consistency of advice, and enhancing privacy and autonomy. However, some participants felt that removing access to a human could undermine a digital support package and reduce engagement. Popular engagement enhancers included self-monitoring (eg, digital recording of smoking; smartphone-linked carbon monoxide monitoring), online communities, and remote access to nicotine substitution options. Digital support was viewed as having potential as a stand-alone intervention or working in conjunction with standard interpersonal treatment.

          Conclusions

          The findings support the investigation of a digital support package as both a stand-alone and adjunct to standard interpersonal cessation support in pregnancy to increase the proportion of pregnant smokers who make a supported quit attempt.

          Implications

          In many countries like the United Kingdom, there are few smoking cessation options routinely available that provide effective support for smoking cessation in pregnancy. To maximize impact, health services need an effective range of strategies to engage with and support quit attempts made by all pregnant smokers, particularly as interpersonal support options are not often well used. Development of a pregnancy-specific digital support package for smoking cessation in pregnancy may represent a means to help address this gap.

          Related collections

          Most cited references45

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Using thematic analysis in psychology

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups.

            Qualitative research explores complex phenomena encountered by clinicians, health care providers, policy makers and consumers. Although partial checklists are available, no consolidated reporting framework exists for any type of qualitative design. To develop a checklist for explicit and comprehensive reporting of qualitative studies (in depth interviews and focus groups). We performed a comprehensive search in Cochrane and Campbell Protocols, Medline, CINAHL, systematic reviews of qualitative studies, author or reviewer guidelines of major medical journals and reference lists of relevant publications for existing checklists used to assess qualitative studies. Seventy-six items from 22 checklists were compiled into a comprehensive list. All items were grouped into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. Duplicate items and those that were ambiguous, too broadly defined and impractical to assess were removed. Items most frequently included in the checklists related to sampling method, setting for data collection, method of data collection, respondent validation of findings, method of recording data, description of the derivation of themes and inclusion of supporting quotations. We grouped all items into three domains: (i) research team and reflexivity, (ii) study design and (iii) data analysis and reporting. The criteria included in COREQ, a 32-item checklist, can help researchers to report important aspects of the research team, study methods, context of the study, findings, analysis and interpretations.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              To saturate or not to saturate? Questioning data saturation as a useful concept for thematic analysis and sample-size rationales

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Nicotine Tob Res
                Nicotine Tob Res
                nictob
                Nicotine & Tobacco Research
                Oxford University Press (US )
                1462-2203
                1469-994X
                February 2025
                26 July 2024
                26 July 2024
                : 27
                : 2
                : 225-235
                Affiliations
                School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia , Norwich, UK
                School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia , Norwich, UK
                School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia , Norwich, UK
                Centre for Academic Primary Care, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham , Nottingham, UK
                Centre for Evidence Based Healthcare, School of Medicine, University of Nottingham , Nottingham, UK
                School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia , Norwich, UK
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Pippa Belderson, PhD, School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK. Telephone: 01603 591694; E-mail: p.belderson@ 123456uea.ac.uk
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2065-6878
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5032-2380
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8915-7033
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7303-4805
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9790-2796
                Article
                ntae184
                10.1093/ntr/ntae184
                11750734
                39058259
                fadf16db-97a5-40ae-b31a-cb53cb39ac43
                © The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 07 August 2023
                : 27 June 2024
                : 17 July 2024
                : 05 August 2024
                Page count
                Pages: 11
                Funding
                Funded by: National Institute for Health Research, DOI 10.13039/501100000272;
                Award ID: NIHR203305
                Categories
                Original Investigations
                AcademicSubjects/MED00010
                AcademicSubjects/SOC02541

                Agriculture
                Agriculture

                Comments

                Comment on this article