49 research outputs found

    Developing and Selecting Auditory Warnings for a Real-Time Behavioral Intervention

    Get PDF
    Real-time sensing and computing technologies are increasingly used in the delivery of real-time health behavior interventions. Auditory signals play a critical role in many of these interventions, impacting not only behavioral response but also treatment adherence and participant retention. Yet, few behavioral interventions that employ auditory feedback report the characteristics of sounds used and even fewer design signals specifically for their intervention. This paper describes a four-step process used in developing and selecting auditory warnings for a behavioral trial designed to reduce indoor secondhand smoke exposure. In step one, relevant information was gathered from ergonomic and behavioral science literature to assist a panel of research assistants in developing criteria for intervention-specific auditory feedback. In step two, multiple sounds were identified through internet searches and modified in accordance with the developed criteria, and two sounds were selected that best met those criteria. In step three, a survey was conducted among 64 persons from the primary sampling frame of the larger behavioral trial to compare the relative aversiveness of sounds, determine respondents\u27 reported behavioral reactions to those signals, and assess participant’s preference between sounds. In the final step, survey results were used to select the appropriate sound for auditory warnings. Ultimately, a single-tone pulse, 500 milliseconds (ms) in length that repeats every 270 ms for three cycles was chosen for the behavioral trial. The methods described herein represent one example of steps that can be followed to develop and select auditory feedback tailored for a given behavioral intervention

    Randomized Trial to Reduce Air Particle Levels in Homes of Smokers and Children

    Get PDF
    Introduction Exposure to fine particulate matter in the home from sources such as smoking, cooking, and cleaning may put residents, especially children, at risk for detrimental health effects. A randomized clinical trial was conducted from 2011 to 2016 to determine whether real-time feedback in the home plus brief coaching of parents or guardians could reduce fine particle levels in homes with smokers and children. Design A randomized trial with two groups—intervention and control. Setting/participants A total of 298 participants from predominantly low-income households with an adult smoker and a child aged \u3c14 years. Participants were recruited during 2012–2015 from multiple sources in San Diego, mainly Women, Infants and Children Program sites. Intervention The multicomponent intervention consisted of continuous lights and brief sound alerts based on fine particle levels in real time and four brief coaching sessions using particle level graphs and motivational interviewing techniques. Motivational interviewing coaching focused on particle reduction to protect children and other occupants from elevated particle levels, especially from tobacco-related sources. Main outcome measures In-home air particle levels were measured by laser particle counters continuously in both study groups. The two outcomes were daily mean particle counts and percentage time with high particle concentrations (\u3e15,000 particles/0.01 ft3). Linear mixed models were used to analyze the differential change in the outcomes over time by group, during 2016–2017. Results Intervention homes had significantly larger reductions than controls in daily geometric mean particle concentrations (18.8% reduction vs 6.5% reduction, p\u3c0.001). Intervention homes’ average percentage time with high particle concentrations decreased 45.1% compared with a 4.2% increase among controls (difference between groups p\u3c0.001). Conclusions Real-time feedback for air particle levels and brief coaching can reduce fine particle levels in homes with smokers and young children. Results set the stage for refining feedback and possible reinforcing consequences for not generating smoke-related particles. Trial registration This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01634334

    Location and home rules of cannabis use – Findings from marijuana use and environmental survey 2020, a nationally representative survey in the United States

    No full text
    Cannabis combustion and aerosolization may be associated with adverse health for users and nonusers through secondhand and thirdhand exposure. As cannabis regulation becomes more lenient, understanding where cannabis is used and whether homes have rules restricting use is needed. This study aimed to identify locations, presence of other people, and in-home rules of cannabis use in the United States (U.S.). This secondary analysis of 3,464 inhalation-based (smoking, vaping, dabbing) cannabis users in past 12 months drew from a cross-sectional probability-based online panel of 21,903 U.S. adults in early 2020, providing nationally representative estimates. We describe presence of other people and location at most recent use (smoking, vaping, dabbing, respectively). We also describe household restrictions on in-home cannabis smoking by cannabis smokers vs non-smokers, and by presence of children in home. Cannabis smoking, vaping, and dabbing most often occurred at users’ own homes (65.7%, 56.8%, and 46.9%, respectively). More than 60% of smoking, vaping, and dabbing occurred with someone else present. About 68% of inhalation-based cannabis users (70% and 55%, smokers and non-smokers, respectively) did not have complete restrictions on in-home cannabis smoking; among them, over a quarter lived with children under 18. In the U.S., inhalation-based cannabis use most commonly occurs at home, with others present and a substantial proportion of users lacking complete in-home cannabis smoking restrictions, raising risks of secondhand and thirdhand smoke exposure. These circumstances demand residential interventions for developing bans on indoor cannabis smoking, especially around vulnerable children

    Perception of harm is strongly associated with complete ban on in-home cannabis smoking: a cross-sectional study

    No full text
    Abstract Background Perception of health risk can influence household rules, but little is known about how the perception of harm from cannabis secondhand smoke (cSHS) is related to having a complete ban on in-home cannabis smoking. We examined this association among a nationally representative sample of United States adults. Methods Respondents were 21,381 adults from the cross-sectional Marijuana Use and Environmental Survey recruited from December 2019-February 2020. Perceived harm of cSHS exposure (extremely harmful, somewhat harmful, mostly safe, or totally safe) and complete ban of cannabis smoking anywhere in the home (yes or no) were self-reported. Logistic regression for survey-weighted data estimated covariate-adjusted odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for the association between perceived harm of cSHS and complete ban on in-home cannabis smoking. Stratified subgroup analyses (by cannabis smoking status, cannabis use legalization in state of residence, and children under age 6 living in the home) were conducted to quantify effect measure modification of the association between perception of harm and complete ban. Results A complete ban on in-home cannabis smoking was reported by 71.8% of respondents. Eight percent reported cSHS as “totally safe”; 20.5% “mostly safe”; 38.3% “somewhat harmful”; and 33.0% “extremely harmful”. Those who reported cSHS as “extremely harmful” had 6 times the odds of a complete ban on in-home cannabis smoking (OR = 6.0, 95%CI = 4.9–7.2) as those reporting smoking as “totally safe”. The odds of a complete ban were higher among those reporting cSHS as “somewhat harmful” (OR = 2.6, 95%CI = 2.2–3.1) or “mostly safe” (OR = 1.4, 95%CI = 1.2–1.7) vs those reporting cSHS as “totally safe”. In each subgroup of cannabis smoking status, state cannabis use legalization, and children under the age of 6 living in the home, perceived harm was associated with a complete ban on in-home cannabis smoking. Conclusions Our study demonstrates perceiving cSHS as harmful is strongly associated with having a complete in-home cannabis smoking ban. With almost a third of US adults perceiving cSHS as at least “mostly safe”, there is strong need to educate the general population about potential risks associated with cSHS exposure to raise awareness and encourage adoption of household rules prohibiting indoor cannabis smoking

    Indoor cannabis smoke and children's health.

    No full text
    Highlights • Indoor cannabis smoking raises particle levels and risk of child particle exposure. • Smoking cannabis in-home may adversely impact child health. • This adverse impact may occur in homes with or without indoor cigarette smoking. • Health effects of secondhand cannabis smoke exposure need to be further explored
    corecore