Smoking cessation: adding a counselor to chatbot support still needs confirmation

Does a chatbot paired with a counselor help people quit smoking more than a chatbot alone? In a randomized pilot trial conducted in China, adding human support produced numerically better abstinence outcomes, but the uncertainty was too great to conclude that it offered a benefit. The abstract reviewed mainly supports the feasibility of this approach.

Illustration of smoking cessation support combining a smartphone conversation and a human counselor.
Gadgets & TechEditorial illustration, not study data.

Human support added to a shared program

The researchers assigned participants to two groups of 71 people. Everyone received group support on WeChat, moderated by a chatbot. The intervention group also received individual support from trained counselors for three months.

This comparison is essential: the trial does not test a chatbot against no support. It aims to determine what a counselor adds to an automated program already provided to both groups.

The primary outcome was biochemically verified abstinence at six months. The researchers also measured abstinence at three months, self-reported abstinence, smoking reduction, and several feasibility indicators.

A favorable difference, but substantial uncertainty

At six months, biochemically verified abstinence was recorded in 15.5% of participants with a counselor, compared with 9.9% in the chatbot-only group. The relative risk was 1.57, with a 95% confidence interval ranging from 0.64 to 3.83. This wide interval does not establish a benefit from the additional support.

At three months, the results pointed in the same direction: 18.3% versus 11.3%, again with no statistically significant difference. Self-reported abstinence and smoking reduction were similar between groups.

The absence of a statistically significant difference does not demonstrate that the two approaches are equivalent. In this pilot trial, the data remain too imprecise to reach a conclusion.

Feasibility does not prove effectiveness

The authors describe the combined program as feasible and well accepted in the Chinese community setting. They also report high engagement and retention, without providing the corresponding values in the available abstract.

These observations encourage further research, but they prove neither the effectiveness of the chatbot itself nor the superiority of combining it with a counselor. They are also insufficient to generalize the findings to a French service or another app.

Limitations to keep in mind

Only the PubMed abstract was reviewed, not the full text. The pilot trial concerns a Chinese community setting and provides imprecise estimates. Funding, conflicts of interest, and details of biochemical verification could not be checked from the source material.

What we can take away

Combining a chatbot with a counselor appears feasible in the setting studied. More precise results are needed to claim that this combination increases the chances of quitting smoking.

Sources and provenance

Partager cet article

X f in

An error or a source to report? Contact the editorial team.