BACKGROUND: Only a few digital interventions have been developed for pregnant smokers, and little is known about the acceptability and usability of smartphone apps to aid cessation in pregnancy. This study aimed to explore pregnant smokers' views on the design, content and usability of a pregnancy-specific smoking cessation app in order to inform intervention development and optimisation. METHODS: Ten interviews were conducted and the 'think-aloud' protocol was used in order to explore participants' views about a smoking cessation smartphone app ('SmokeFree Baby'). The data were subsequently thematically analysed. Participants were 18 and over, pregnant, and daily or weekly cigarette smokers. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: views about the design elements, mode of delivery and content of the intervention. App design was considered as an important element that might influence potential users' engagement with the intervention. Participants felt that the intervention content was educational, motivational and non-judgemental. However, it was emphasised that the app should provide further options for personalisation and include more practical features. CONCLUSIONS: Delivering smoking cessation support via a smartphone app can be feasible and acceptable for pregnant smokers. They appear to value content that is motivational, educational and personalised, and meeting these requirements may be important for user experience and promoting engagement with the intervention.
BACKGROUND: Only a few digital interventions have been developed for pregnant smokers, and little is known about the acceptability and usability of smartphone apps to aid cessation in pregnancy. This study aimed to explore pregnant smokers' views on the design, content and usability of a pregnancy-specific smoking cessation app in order to inform intervention development and optimisation. METHODS: Ten interviews were conducted and the 'think-aloud' protocol was used in order to explore participants' views about a smoking cessation smartphone app ('SmokeFree Baby'). The data were subsequently thematically analysed. Participants were 18 and over, pregnant, and daily or weekly cigarette smokers. RESULTS: Three main themes were identified: views about the design elements, mode of delivery and content of the intervention. App design was considered as an important element that might influence potential users' engagement with the intervention. Participants felt that the intervention content was educational, motivational and non-judgemental. However, it was emphasised that the app should provide further options for personalisation and include more practical features. CONCLUSIONS: Delivering smoking cessation support via a smartphone app can be feasible and acceptable for pregnant smokers. They appear to value content that is motivational, educational and personalised, and meeting these requirements may be important for user experience and promoting engagement with the intervention.
Stopping smoking at any stage of pregnancy has many health benefits, and mothers who
successfully stop smoking by the third month of their pregnancy have similar risks
for smoking-attributable pregnancy complications to those of non-smoking mothers.[1] Effective smoking cessation support (e.g. behavioural support and nicotine
replacement therapy (NRT)) is available for pregnant smokers within the National
Health Service (NHS) in England,[2-4] but it has low uptake due to a
number of barriers relating to engagement with health professionals on a
face-to-face basis (e.g. fear of being judged).[5] Digital interventions may address some of these barriers, but little is known
about their use in pregnancy.Digital behaviour change interventions (e.g. web or mobile phone-based behavioural
support) have become common in recent years,[6] and some of these digital interventions that aid smoking cessation have been
found to be effective in the general population.[7,8] Only a few digital interventions
have been developed for pregnant smokers,[9,10] but studies have shown
promising results in terms of feasibility and potential effectiveness.[11-16] In order to advance the
development of digital smoking cessation interventions for pregnant smokers,
previous studies[11-16] have called for future
research to establish optimal methods of delivering theory-based interventions on
different digital platforms, the level of personalisation required, the structure
and regularity of intervention delivery, and the usability of the intervention in
relation to its design and content elements. However, to the best of our knowledge,
no study has been published on the usability evaluation of a smoking cessation aid
for pregnant smokers using a smartphone app as a platform for intervention
delivery.The ‘SmokeFree Baby’ smartphone app (www.smokefreebaby.co.uk) has
been developed to provide a readily available smoking cessation aid for pregnant
smokers free of charge.[10] The intervention development was informed by the Multiphase Optimisation Strategy,[17] the UK Medical Research Council guidance,[18] the Behaviour Change Wheel,[19] the COM-B model of behavior,[20] the plans, responses, impulses, motives, evaluations (PRIME) theory of motivation,[21] evidence from the scientific literature, and 42 behavioural change techniques
(BCTs) from the BCT Taxonomy v1.[22] The app is divided into a general app feature (‘Toolbox’) and five
experimental modules (‘Identity’, ‘Stress Relief’, ‘Health Effects’, ‘Face-to-Face’
and ‘Behaviour’) in order to evaluate their effects in a factorial experiment. Each
experimental module has an intensive (with interactive features) and minimal
(text-only) version, and a key intervention target, as follows. The ‘Identity’
module provides advice to help pregnant women establish a new non-smoker identity,
the ‘Stress relief’ module addresses stress management, the ‘Health Effects’ module
provides information about the health effects of smoking and benefits of cessation,
the ‘Face-to-Face’ module provides ready access to stop smoking services in the
localities, and the ‘Behaviour’ module provides distraction from urges to smoke. The
‘Toolbox’ feature provides information about a range of topics, including NRT use,
social support and the amount of money that pregnant women have saved by not
smoking.Developing complex digital interventions requires an iterative process of evaluation
and refinement of the intervention. An essential step in this process is to conduct
usability testing in order to explore potential users’ views about the intervention
and evaluate its acceptability and feasibility in the target population.[23] Previous studies have reported the usability evaluation of various
internet-delivered health care interventions[24,25] and smartphone apps, such as
to improve self-management strategies among young adults with sickle cell disease[26] and improve self-management of pain among people with chronic or recurrent
pain episodes.[27] A common method for usability evaluation of health behaviour interventions is
the think-aloud method.[25] In order to inform future development of digital interventions, particularly
mobile technologies, this study aimed to explore pregnant smokers’ views on the
design, content and usability of a smoking cessation app by applying the think-aloud
method.
Methods
Design
The think-aloud method was used to conduct the interviews. In order to gain
insights into participants’ cognitive process and attitudes towards the
SmokeFree Baby application, this protocol involved asking participants to freely
verbalise their thoughts and feelings they might have whilst engaging with the
intervention.[23,25] The SmokeFree Baby app was downloaded from the Apple App
Store by the interviewer onto a smartphone, which was provided for participants
during the interviews. All interviews were audio-recorded, and the screen of the
smartphone was video-recorded in order to document which sections of the app
participants were using during the interviews. Participants received high-street
vouchers worth £30 to compensate them for their time and effort. Ethical
approval was obtained from the University College London’s Psychology and
Language Sciences Departmental Ethics Committee (Project ID: CEHP/2013/508).
Participants
Advertisements for the study were distributed to charities and stop-smoking
clinics in London, and online advertisements were placed on pregnancy-specific
forums and local community websites. In order to take part, participants had to
be at least 18 years of age, be pregnant, and smoke cigarettes at least once a
week. Twenty-six people responded to the recruitment advertisement, and ten
pregnant smokers were interviewed. Sixteen individuals were excluded from taking
part in the study, as they either stopped corresponding, were not able to
participate due to travel, or did not meet the eligibility criteria. Those under
the age of 18 who did not smoke at least once a week and were no longer pregnant
were excluded. All participants were naïve users, as they had not engaged with
the SmokeFree Baby app prior to the interview.
Procedure
Informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to the interviews.
Participants completed a brief questionnaire asking them about their age, weeks
of pregnancy, education, motivation to stop smoking (‘How motivated are you to
give up smoking at this attempt?’, ranging from 0 ‘Not motivated at all’ to 3
‘Extremely motivated’), as well as confidence in their ability to quit (‘How
confident are you in your ability to stop smoking?’, ranging from 0 ‘Not
confident at all’ to 3 ‘Extremely confident’). Nicotine dependence was measured
using the Heaviness of Smoking Index.[28] Data from the background questionnaire were used for contextual
understanding of the study.The complete test version of the app was used, in which the intensive version of
each experimental module was presented to participants, in order to evaluate all
app features. There were no practice trials, but the interviewer explained the
think-aloud method through a brief example to ensure that participants
understood the method. Participants were asked to say out loud anything that
came across their minds whilst using the app, and they were encouraged to make
both positive and negative comments. Participants were also informed that the
interviewer was not involved in the development of the app. If a participant
stopped talking, the interviewer intervened by prompting her with open-ended
questions, such as ‘What are your thoughts right now?’ to maintain the flow of
conversation.There was no time limit to the interviews, and there were no restrictions on the
length of response a participant could give. Before finishing the interview, the
interviewer prompted participants to revisit features that had not been explored
and encouraged them to say out loud what they thought about those sections. Each
interview lasted approximately 30 minutes.
Data analysis
Interviews were transcribed verbatim and each participant was assigned a code for
identification. The data were analysed thematically.[29] Transcripts were read and re-read by JW to familiarise herself with the
dataset. An initial coding framework was generated manually around emergent
themes. Recurrent themes and subthemes were identified in an iterative process
by JW and IT, which involved checking the coding for consistency and developing
and refining the thematic framework. Illustrative quotes for each theme were
selected. No analytic software was used for data analysis.
Results
Table 1 reports
participants’ socio-demographic characteristics. In the thematic analysis, three
main themes were identified in participants’ accounts: views about the design
elements (e.g. aesthetics of the app), mode of delivery (e.g. functionalities in the
app) and intervention content (e.g. usefulness). Each theme and related subthemes
with illustrative quotes are described in detail below, and further quotes are
reported in the supplementary file (Table S1).
Table 1.
Participants’ demographic and background characteristics.
Total (n = 10)
Age, mean (SD); range
28.5 (5.7); 19–36
Weeks of pregnancy, mean (SD); range
12.9 (7.3); 8–29
Highest level of education completed, %
(n)
High school
50.0 (5)
Bachelor degree
40.0 (4)
Masters or above
10.0 (1)
Heaviness of Smoking Index, mean (SD)
1.5 (1.9)
Motivation to give up smoking at this attempt, mean
(SD)
2.2 (1.1)
Confidence in ability to stop smoking, mean (SD)
1.2 (0.9)
Participants’ demographic and background characteristics.
I. Pregnant smokers’ views about the design elements
1. Aesthetics
Generally, pregnant smokers felt that the app was well designed. Although the
colour, font type and visuals in the app were perceived as appealing,
participants noted that the overall user experience could be improved by
using a variety of colours to highlight different features, adding an option
for customisable colours, increasing the font size, and adding animated
elements to various app features.It would be nice if it was a bit alive, like animated text, I don’t
know. I’d quite like that. You scroll and it kind of just flows. I
mean there is no difference between reading a book and reading this.
So I guess I want to look at something quite lush visually. (P6, 33
years old)
2. Navigation
Participants reported that it was easy to operate and navigate between
different parts of the app. Of the main features, some participants were
naturally drawn to the ‘Stress Relief’ feature upon entering the application
(Figure 1).
However, a number of potentially useful features that were less prominent in
the design, such as ‘Frequently Asked Questions’, ‘About’, ‘Settings’ and
‘Tools to Quit’, would sometimes remain undiscovered by users without
prompting (Figure 2).The importance of presenting the intervention content, such as
the tips to help women cope with stress, in shorter segments instead of a
long list of tips was also emphasised.
Figure 1.
Screenshot of the upper half of the main dashboard with
easy-to-discover features (Toolbox, Identity, Stress
Relief, Health Effects, Face-to-Face, Behaviour) that
drew participants’ attention naturally.
Figure 2.
Screenshot of the bottom half of the main dashboard with
less prominent features (Frequently Asked Questions,
About, Settings, Tools to Quit) that often remained
undiscovered without prompting.
I wouldn’t have found that [‘Tools to Quit’ feature]. That’s good
because it tells you what you need to do to quit, so I quite like
that. Maybe it should actually be at the top somewhere, because by
doing that you know where you need to go instead of doing it at the
end, which is quite pointless. (P8, 19 years old)Screenshot of the upper half of the main dashboard with
easy-to-discover features (Toolbox, Identity, Stress
Relief, Health Effects, Face-to-Face, Behaviour) that
drew participants’ attention naturally.Screenshot of the bottom half of the main dashboard with
less prominent features (Frequently Asked Questions,
About, Settings, Tools to Quit) that often remained
undiscovered without prompting.It [a feature within stress management tips] is quite helpful, but I
think the layout, because this is at the top and sometimes I
wouldn’t even think to scroll down in a way. (P9, 26 years old)
II. Mode of delivery of intervention content
3. Functionality
Easy access to intervention content, such as contact details of local stop
smoking services, both online and offline, was perceived as important.Participants commented that the app felt interactive and
provided lots of functionality by means of different app features in which
the content was delivered in various ways (e.g. quizzes, videos) going
beyond a more traditional text-based format.It was also noted that the app could include a pedometer
feature to facilitate physical activity during the quit attempt, and
pregnant smokers’ reviews of different NRT products in order to help others
decide which products they should try.Although some app features were perceived as unnecessary (e.g.
adding contact details of friends to have ready access to social support),
most women found it useful to make use of the built-in functions of their
smartphones (e.g. camera) as part of the intervention.You would find them [contact details of stop smoking services] on
Google, but having a number there at hand that you can use straight
away is always helpful. (P4, 25 years old)I quite like the quiz. It’s very interactive, which is really good
and it helps you learn more about what you are actually doing to
your body and to your baby’s body without actually doing it in a
patronising way. (P8, 19 years old)I think what they can add to that [a feature about smoking cessation
medications] is they could say people can rate them [different NRT
products] as to which ones are popular and which brands are good
ones. (P3, 31 years old)That’s [a video diary feature] helpful, because you can take pictures
of your skin, you can take pictures of your teeth, you can take
pictures and videos of your changes and your body and that’s
helpful. (P7, 20 years old)
4. Regular update of content
In order to motivate users to maintain engagement with the intervention,
pregnant smokers argued that the content of various app features should be
updated on a daily basis. Therefore, the daily tips and videos were seen as
potentially useful, but it was also emphasised that the app could be
improved by including more videos from a number of different pregnant ex-smokers.This [a ‘Tip of the Day’ feature] would be helpful, as long as it is
everyday. If it comes back say four days in with the same thing,
then that’s going to annoy me, because I feel like I have just
wasted my time, so it’s got to be different everyday, and that’s
seven days a week really. (P1, 30 years old)
5. Availability of help
Pregnant smokers emphasised that it was important for them to know that help
is readily available and non-judgemental expert advice is always at hand
through the app when they need it. From their perspectives, videos with stop
smoking advisors were particularly useful, as these were encouraging and
provided good-quality smoking cessation advice similar to the experience of
visiting a smoking cessation clinic.I feel like I have gone to the smoking cessation nurse without going
to the smoking cessation nurse. (P4, 25 years old)
6. Language
Pregnant smokers felt that the tone of the app was not patronising or
intimidating, and the difficulties of giving up smoking during pregnancy
were recognised. Therefore, they would recommend SmokeFree Baby to their
friends, as advice to quit was communicated in a non-judgemental way.On the other hand, many participants said that the language
used to deliver specific aspects of the intervention content (e.g. health
effects of smoking) was too technical and therefore would discourage women
from maintaining engagement with the app.I like the fact that they’ve recognized that [it can be difficult to
stop smoking] because to be honest, when it comes down to your
general doctor, they are not very understanding. Most of them
haven’t smoked, so they don’t really know how hard it actually is.
But the fact that this app here just that little bit there
recognises that it is something that is not going to happen
overnight, it’s quite reassuring. (P1, 30 years old)I think the issue that I have with this is when it gets too
technical. It’s too much, it’s too much thinking, I don’t want to
deal with it. It just needs to be quick and straight to the point
and get the message across. (P3, 31 years old)
III. Pregnant smokers’ views about the intervention content
7. Usefulness
Generally, participants perceived the intervention content as educational and
informative. They felt that the app covered a range of topics, some of which
were seen as particularly important (e.g. stress management tips), provided
detailed information about smoking cessation, and included a sufficient
amount of tips and advice to help women with their quit attempts during pregnancy.Participants emphasised that the app provided educational
information they did not know previously, especially in relation to the
health effects of smoking during pregnancy, NRT and smoking cessation
medications, and the different types of face-to-face support available for
pregnant smokers.Some women mentioned that the app content was mainly
knowledge-based and commented that more practical features would be needed
in addition to the breathing exercise or distraction game, even though the
usefulness of these features was sometimes questioned.There is a lot to play around with there that pretty much covered all
grounds, I would say. I can’t think of anything else you could
possibly put on here really. (P4, 25 years old)The other options that you have: hours, home visit, which I was not
aware of. Telephone support is good. The fact that you can drop into
any clinics in your area, I didn’t actually know that either. It’s
given me extra information so far. (P1, 30 years old)Giving me the theory of why I shouldn’t smoke and what is the
experiences of people I don’t know. How does that help me? I don’t
feel that helps me stop. Like with the distraction game, that’s
something that is really there to help me at the moment when I need
it. (P3, 31 years old)
8. Personal relevance
Most women in this study reported that they were able to relate to the
content of the app on a personal level, and they found it particularly
inspiring to watch videos with a pregnant ex-smoker talking about her
experiences with quitting.However, some participants recognised that a number of tips
would not be relevant to them due to their individual motivational
background or life circumstances, and felt that the content was not
personalised enough to meet their individual needs, as it did not provide a
structured quit plan tailored to their cigarette dependence.I can imagine this would help quite a lot: talking to ex-smokers
about what helped them quit and then all different sections [in the
‘Identity’ module]. This is really good, because I think you need
communication with other people who have gone through the same
situation as you to make you feel like you are not alone. So this is
probably my favourite section so far. (P8, 19 years old)Something more personalised just for you. It needs to be personalised
definitely. It can’t just do it all for everyone […] because some
are heavy smokers and some are light smokers. (P10, 29 years
old)
9. Motivational properties
Pregnant smokers felt that various aspects of the app (e.g. health quiz,
video diary of their progress) were thought-provoking and boosted their
motivation to stop smoking, especially when the content prompted them to
think about their baby.However, some participants expressed that it is difficult to
remain motivated in some situations even with help from the app available at
hand, and that using distraction and motivational support may not always
prevent lapses or relapse.Participants noted that monitoring the number of smoke-free
days could help them maintain their motivation to remain abstinent; however,
monitoring the amount of money saved by not smoking could be both
motivational and potentially annoying.Finally, participants emphasised that it could be motivational
to learn more about how pregnant ex-smokers changed their habits during the
quit attempts and how they coped with cravings and withdrawal.That makes you think more about your situation and that you are
planning to have a baby, and it motivates you more. (P5, 36 years
old)Once the seed is planted you want a cigarette, you would just look
forward to the moment till the end of this [distraction features] to
have a cigarette, because that’s what happens. Because if I want a
cigarette, I would be like okay, I am going to do that [distraction
game] and that [distraction quiz] and I am going to reward myself
with a cigarette. (P3, 31 years old)That’s [progress bar] quite motivational, because I guess if you have
gone so far, you don’t want to ruin it. (P8, 19 years old)I don’t want it to tell me how much I’ve saved, because I remind
myself how much I have saved by having extra money available. For
me, it does come across as a bit pushy by telling me ‘oh you saved
this amount of money’. I’ll be like ‘yeah … what is your point’. I
will know that, you don’t need to tell me. (P1, 30 years old)I think it would be very helpful if there were videos of her […]
showing her daily routine, saying ‘I really feel like I need a
cigarette right now guys, and this is what I am going to do.’ […] So
because I feel like if she is real, I can observe her resist her
cravings, then I will feel like I can learn something, like even
from her emotions or something. (P6, 33 years old)
Discussion
This study provides in-depth insights into users’ experiences with SmokeFree Baby in
order to better understand how smoking cessation smartphone apps should be designed
and configured to meet the needs of pregnant smokers. Findings of this study suggest
that apps need to visually appeal to this specific target group, as the design of
the app may influence potential users’ willingness to engage with the intervention.
Delivering smoking cessation support in a non-intimidating and non-patronising
manner and through interactive features seems highly valued by pregnant smokers.
Participants found the motivational and informative properties (e.g. evidence-based
information regarding the effects of smoking on their health) of the intervention
content important, but thought the text should be easy to understand. Providing
fresh content on a regular basis, particularly in relation to cravings management,
appears to be an essential requirement to maintain the engagement of pregnant
smokers with the intervention. Findings from this study also indicate that social
support and personal relevance in relation to the content and personalisation of the
app are important for this target population.In line with previous findings regarding text-message programmes,[15] this study found that availability of help and having non-judgmental advice
at hand were seen as important aspects of a smartphone app to aid cessation during
pregnancy. Receiving educational content in relation to smoking and cessation was
also perceived positively by pregnant smokers.[13] Similarly to internet-based smoking cessation interventions,[12] having regular content updates, practical features and a variety of features
could be desirable qualities of pregnancy-specific smoking cessation apps. Although
information and practical features in relation to cravings and withdrawal are
provided in SmokeFree Baby, it appears that pregnant smokers would have preferred
additional tools to cope with cravings. Since pregnant smokers valued the social
support component of the app, future intervention development may take advantage of
smartphone technology as a communication tool and elevate the types of social
support available in apps (e.g. provide a platform for users to share real-time
advice and experiences with each other). Although this qualitative study supports
the importance of providing personalised content in digital smoking cessation
interventions in pregnancy,[12,14] as it was perceived to be more engaging than non-personalised
features, quantitative indices of engagement with the intervention (e.g. number of
logins to the app) would need to be evaluated.A limitation of this study is that it only evaluated the SmokeFree Baby application,
and although it provides potentially useful inputs for the development of future
digital interventions for pregnant smokers, the results may not be generalisable to
all types of digital aids. Another limitation is the relatively small sample size,
as despite using multiple channels for recruitment for almost a year, only 10
participants were interviewed. However, this is in line with previous
studies,[11,12] which also found it difficult to engage pregnant smokers to
participate in research studies.[14,30,31] For example, similarly to this
study, fewer than 40% of pregnant smokers who were invited were willing to take part
in a telephone interview to explore their views about internet-based interventions
for smoking cessation,[12] even though participants did not need to travel to meet with the researcher
in person, unlike pregnant smokers in this study. Moreover, guidelines[32] have suggested that approximately 6–10 interviews can be considered
appropriate for a small qualitative study in order to conduct in-depth analysis from
the material collected. The development and testing of digital interventions needs
to be done iteratively, and the aim of this study was to recruit a sample that was
feasible within the time and research constraints, and also sufficient to inform the
refinement of the intervention. Although participants received a thorough briefing
on the think-aloud protocol at the beginning of the interview, they sometimes tried
to engage with the interviewer, and consequent input from the interviewer may have
influenced participants’ cognitive processes.[33] The interviewer only provided inputs when it was absolutely necessary, and
her involvement was non-directive in order to minimise bias. Lastly, as is the case
for all qualitative research, the study does not allow generalisation beyond the
immediate sample. However, this type of qualitative analysis has been recognised as
a useful and essential step to evaluate the usability of digital intervention tools
as part of their stages of development.[34]This study contributes to a better understanding of pregnant smokers’ views about
digital smoking cessation interventions, which is a relatively new, emerging field
in the literature. It appears that a smartphone app can be a suitable medium to
provide expert advice and social support for pregnant smokers and deliver smoking
cessation intervention during pregnancy. While the effectiveness of smoking
cessation apps in pregnancy has yet to be investigated, and quantitative usage data
will need to validate these findings, this study suggests that the SmokeFree Baby
app is acceptable and potentially useful for its target population.
Authors: Elyse R Park; Virginia P Quinn; Yuchiao Chang; Susan Regan; Beverly Loudin; Sharon Cummins; Kristin Perry; Nancy A Rigotti Journal: Prev Med Date: 2007-01-03 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Linda M Collins; Timothy B Baker; Robin J Mermelstein; Megan E Piper; Douglas E Jorenby; Stevens S Smith; Bruce A Christiansen; Tanya R Schlam; Jessica W Cook; Michael C Fiore Journal: Ann Behav Med Date: 2011-04
Authors: Charmian Reynoldson; Catherine Stones; Matthew Allsop; Peter Gardner; Michael I Bennett; S José Closs; Rick Jones; Peter Knapp Journal: Pain Med Date: 2014-01-14 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Ildiko Tombor; Emma Beard; Jamie Brown; Lion Shahab; Susan Michie; Robert West Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2019-07-16 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Allison N Kurti; Katherine Tang; Hypatia A Bolivar; Carolyn Evemy; Norman Medina; Joan Skelly; Tyler Nighbor; Stephen T Higgins Journal: Prev Med Date: 2020-07-09 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Lisa McDaid; Ross Thomson; Joanne Emery; Tim Coleman; Sue Cooper; Lucy Phillips; Felix Naughton Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-04-28 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Katarzyna Campbell; Thomas Coleman-Haynes; Katharine Bowker; Sue E Cooper; Sarah Connelly; Tim Coleman Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2020-05-22