Cited by 37Smoking Behavior and CessationMindfulness and Compassion InterventionsMobile Health and mHealth Applications

Mindfulness-Based Smoking Cessation Enhanced With Mobile Technology (iQuit Mindfully): Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

Open access
Spears, Claire Adams, Abroms, Lorien C, Glass, Carol R, Hedeker, Donald, Eriksen, Michael P, Cottrell-Daniels, Cherell, Tran, Binh Q, Wetter, David W·2019·JMIR mHealth and uHealth

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Mindfulness training shows promise for improving smoking cessation and lapse recovery, and between-session mobile health messages could enhance treatment engagement and effectiveness. Personalized, in-the-moment text messaging support could be particularly useful for low-income smokers with fewer smoking cessation resources. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study examined the feasibility of a text messaging program (iQuit Mindfully) as an adjunct to in-person Mindfulness-Based Addiction Treatment (MBAT) for smoking cessation. METHODS: A total of 71 participants were randomly assigned to MBAT (n=33) or iQuit Mindfully (n=38; MBAT + between-session text messages); of these, 70% (50/71) were African American, and 61% (43/71) had an annual household income of US $30,000 or less. All participants received 8 weekly therapist-led group counseling sessions, nicotine patches, and self-help materials. Outcomes were feasibility (attrition, engagement, and participants' ratings), participants' feedback regarding the text messaging intervention, and smoking cessation (assessed in person). RESULTS: Strong retention was achieved (76% [54/71] at the end of treatment, and 89% [63/71] at 1-month follow-up). In the iQuit Mindfully group, engagement was high (88% [29/33] indicated reading all or most texts, and 89% [34/38] engaged in interactive texting), and participants provided positive ratings (on a 1-10 scale, average rating for recommending the program to others was 8.4 [SD 2.5]). Participants indicated benefiting from the texts (eg, appreciating encouraging reminders, coping strategies, and social support) and suggested improvements (eg, more personalization). Overall, biochemically confirmed smoking cessation rates were 22% (12/55) at the end of treatment and 19% (12/62) at 1-month follow-up, with no differences between conditions. Living below the poverty level predicted worse cessation outcomes at 1-month follow-up among participants receiving in-person only treatment (P=.03) but not among those receiving iQuit Mindfully. CONCLUSIONS: Text messaging appears to be a feasible and acceptable modality for supporting mindfulness-based smoking cessation treatment. The availability of 24/7 text messaging might be particularly helpful for low-income smokers who have access to fewer cessation resources and experience significant day-to-day barriers to quitting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03029819; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03029819.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/13059

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 67 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Spears, C. A., Abroms, L. C., Glass, C. R., Hedeker, D., Eriksen, M. P., Cottrell-Daniels, C., Tran, B. Q., & Wetter, D. W.
Affiliations
  • Georgia State University (US)
  • George Washington University (US)
  • Catholic University of America (US)
  • University of Chicago (US)
  • University of Utah (US)
Corresponding author
Spears, Claire Adams
Venue
JMIR mHealth and uHealth
Published
2019-06-24
Volume
7
Issue
6
Pages
e13059
ISSN
2291-5222 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2943651095
Cited by
37
References
67
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR mhealth and uhealth (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
  • Huntsman Cancer Foundation (P30CA042014)
  • National Institutes of Health (5ul1tr001067-05, UL1TR001067)
  • National Cancer Institute (UL1TR001067, U01CA229437, P30CA042014)
  • National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (UL1-TR001067)
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (K23AT008442)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › 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, mobile health, text messaging, low-income smokers, African American smokers, treatment engagement, treatment retention, nicotine patch, relapse prevention, poverty level, feasibility, social support, coping strategies, group counseling, nicotine dependence, treatment acceptability, treatment discontinuation
MeSH terms
Smokers, Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pilot Projects, Health Behavior, Smoking Cessation, Text Messaging, Mindfulness

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