The DOI matches its Crossref record; 43 of the 43 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Randomized, controlled pilot trial of a smartphone app for smoking cessation using acceptance and commitment therapy
Open accessAbstract
Background There is a dual need for (1) innovative theory-based smartphone applications for smoking cessation and (2) controlled trials to evaluate their efficacy. Accordingly, this study tested the feasibility, acceptability, preliminary efficacy, and mechanism of behavioral change of an innovative smartphone-delivered acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT) application for smoking cessation vs. an application following US Clinical Practice Guidelines.Method Adult participants were recruited nationally into the double-blind randomized controlled pilot trial (n=196) that compared smartphone-delivered ACT for smoking cessation application (SmartQuit) with the National Cancer Institute's application for smoking cessation (QuitGuide).Results We recruited 196 participants in two months. SmartQuit participants opened their application an average of 37.2 times, as compared to 15.2 times for QuitGuide participants (p<0001). The overall quit rates were 13% in SmartQuit vs. 8% in QuitGuide (OR=2.7; 95% CI=0.8-10.3). Consistent with ACT's theory of change, among those scoring low (below the median) on acceptance of cravings at baseline (n=88), the quit rates were 15% in SmartQuit vs. 8% in QuitGuide (OR=2.9; 95% CI=0.6-20.7).Conclusions ACT is feasible to deliver by smartphone application and shows higher engagement and promising quit rates compared to an application that follows US Clinical Practice Guidelines. As results were limited by the pilot design (e.g., small sample), a full-scale efficacy trial is now needed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“ACT has been administered successfully in 1-day workshops [45], telehealth coaching calls [52, 55], online and smartphone interventions [53], and 20-min sessions integrated into primary care visits [51], demonstrating the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of brief ACT interventions.”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: A Transdiagnostic Behavioral Intervention for Mental Health and Medical Conditions. (2017) · cites this paper as [55]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Work by Bricker et al. [53 -56] has demonstrated that ACT interventions in various delivery formats (face-to-face, online, smartphone app, telephone) have led to greater smoking cessation rates than gold-standard cognitive behavioral therapy comparison interventions.”
From Acceptance and Commitment Therapy: A Transdiagnostic Behavioral Intervention for Mental Health and Medical Conditions. (2017) · cites this paper as [55]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Of the five RCTs of ACT for smoking cessation that Lee et al. [30] analyzed, three were conducted by Bricker et al. [35–37], who have continued to publish in this area since that time [38, 39].”
From A Randomized Feasibility/Acceptability Trial of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy for People with HIV Who Drink at Unhealthy Levels. (2026) · cites this paper as [37]
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“In these randomized controlled trials, the effectiveness of ACT has been demonstrated for a wide range of mental health issues, including anxiety [21], substance abuse, psychosis [22], aggression, and treatment-resistant psychopathology [23].”
From Application of the Nursing Model Based on Acceptance and Commitment Therapy (ACT) in Improving Mental Health and Quality of Life after Colorectal Cancer Drug Chemotherapy (2021) · cites this paper as [22]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing
R Core Team (2000) · doi:10.32614/r.manuals · Cited by 355,893
The Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence: a revision of the Fagerstrom Tolerance Questionnaire
HEATHERTON, T. F., KOZLOWSKI, L. T., FRECKER, R. C., & FAGERSTROM, K. (1991) · British Journal of Addiction · doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.1991.tb01879.x · Cited by 10,738
Acceptance and commitment therapy: model, processes and outcomes
Hayes, S. C., Luoma, J. B., Bond, F. W., Masuda, A., & Lillis, J. (2006) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2005.06.006 · Cited by 6,587
The Health consequences of smoking—50 years of progress : a report of the Surgeon General
Lushniak, B. D., Samet, J. M., Pechacek, T. F., Norman, L., & Taylor, P. A. (2014) · Cited by 4,990
Treating Tobacco Use and Dependence: 2008 Update
Panel, T. U. A. D. G. (2008) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e566222009-001 · Cited by 3,864
Treating tobacco use and dependence-Clinical practice guideline
Mc, F. (2000) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 3,616
The Health Consequences of Smoking -- 50 Years of progress: A Report of the Surgeon General
General, U. S. S. (2014) · PsycEXTRA Dataset · doi:10.1037/e510072014-001 · Cited by 3,368
Clinical Practice Guideline: Otitis Media with Effusion (Update)
Rosenfeld, R. M., Shin, J. J., Schwartz, S. R., Coggins, R., Gagnon, L., Hackell, J. M., Hoelting, D., Hunter, L. L., Kummer, A. W., Payne, S. C., et al. (2016) · Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery · doi:10.1177/0194599815623467 · Cited by 2,006
Biochemical verification of tobacco use and cessation
Benowitz, N. L., III, P. J., Ahijevych, K., Jarvis, M. J., Hall, S., LeHouezec, J., Hansson, A., Lichtenstein, E., Henningfield, J., Tsoh, J., et al. (2002) · Nicotine & Tobacco Research · doi:10.1080/14622200210123581 · Cited by 1,800
Heatherton, T. F., Kozlowski, L. T., Frecker, R. C., Rickert, W. S., & Robinson, J. C. (1989) · British Journal of Addiction · doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.1989.tb03059.x · Cited by 1,316
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Heffner, J.L., Mull, K., Kientz, J.L., Vilardaga, R., Bricker, J.B. (in review). What is popular is not always right: feature-level analysis of the first acceptance and commitment therapy smartphone application for smoking cessation.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mobile phone-based interventions for smoking cessation
Whittaker, R., McRobbie, H., Bullen, C., Rodgers, A., & Gu, Y. (2016) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006611.pub4 · Cited by 1,079
The Future of Intervention Science: Process-Based Therapy
Hofmann, S. G., & Hayes, S. C. (2019) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702618772296 · Cited by 888
Can Mobile Phone Apps Influence People’s Health Behavior Change? An Evidence Review
Zhao, J., Freeman, B., & Li, M. (2016) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/jmir.5692 · Cited by 618
“A total of 10 studies were at low risk of attrition bias [9-11,31,35,36,38,42,43,45].”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialMobile phone text messaging and app-based interventions for smoking cessation
Whittaker, R., McRobbie, H., Bullen, C., Rodgers, A., Gu, Y., & Dobson, R. (2019) · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · doi:10.1002/14651858.cd006611.pub5 · Cited by 452
Milne-Ives, M., Lam, C., De Cock, C., Van Velthoven, M. H., & Meinert, E. (2020) · JMIR mhealth and uhealth · doi:10.2196/17046 · Cited by 393
Metadata
- Authors
- Bricker, J. B., Mull, K. E., Kientz, J. A., Vilardaga, R., Mercer, L. D., Akioka, K. J., & Heffner, J. L.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Fred Hutch Cancer Center (US)
- Corresponding author
- Bricker, Jonathan B.
- ORCID
- Venue
- Drug and Alcohol Dependence
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2014-10
- Volume
- 143
- Pages
- 87-94
- ISSN
- 0376-8716 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4201179
- OpenAlex
- W2089288064
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 43
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 33 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 34 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 3
- FWCI
- 20.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Drug and Alcohol Dependence (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
- National Institute of Mental Health (T32MH082709)
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (K99DA037276, K23DA026517)
- National Cancer Institute (R01CA151251, R01CA166646)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Mindfulness and Compassion Interventions
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Mobile Health and mHealth Applications
- Keywords
- smoking cessation, acceptance and commitment therapy, mobile application, mobile health, quit rates, app engagement, feasibility and acceptability
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Pilot Projects, Therapy, Computer-Assisted, Smoking Cessation, Behavior, Addictive, Treatment Outcome, Cell Phone, Mobile Applications, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
