Suppr超能文献

电子烟和无烟烟草与卷烟相比的感知相对危害测量指标的效标效度。

Criterion validity of measures of perceived relative harm of e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco compared to cigarettes.

作者信息

Persoskie Alexander, Nguyen Anh B, Kaufman Annette R, Tworek Cindy

机构信息

Office of Science, Center for Tobacco Products, FDA, Silver Spring, MD, USA.

Office of Science, Center for Tobacco Products, FDA, Silver Spring, MD, USA.

出版信息

Addict Behav. 2017 Apr;67:100-105. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.01.001. Epub 2017 Jan 4.

Abstract

Beliefs about the relative harmfulness of one product compared to another (perceived relative harm) are central to research and regulation concerning tobacco and nicotine-containing products, but techniques for measuring such beliefs vary widely. We compared the validity of direct and indirect measures of perceived harm of e-cigarettes and smokeless tobacco (SLT) compared to cigarettes. On direct measures, participants explicitly compare the harmfulness of each product. On indirect measures, participants rate the harmfulness of each product separately, and ratings are compared. The U.S. Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS-FDA-2015; N=3738) included direct measures of perceived harm of e-cigarettes and SLT compared to cigarettes. Indirect measures were created by comparing ratings of harm from e-cigarettes, SLT, and cigarettes on 3-point scales. Logistic regressions tested validity by assessing whether direct and indirect measures were associated with criterion variables including: ever-trying e-cigarettes, ever-trying snus, and SLT use status. Compared to the indirect measures, the direct measures of harm were more consistently associated with criterion variables. On direct measures, 26% of adults rated e-cigarettes as less harmful than cigarettes, and 11% rated SLT as less harmful than cigarettes. Direct measures appear to provide valid information about individuals' harm beliefs, which may be used to inform research and tobacco control policy. Further validation research is encouraged.

摘要

关于一种产品相对于另一种产品的相对危害性(感知到的相对危害)的信念,是烟草及含尼古丁产品研究与监管的核心,但衡量此类信念的技术差异很大。我们比较了与香烟相比,电子烟和无烟烟草(SLT)感知危害的直接测量方法和间接测量方法的有效性。在直接测量中,参与者明确比较每种产品的危害性。在间接测量中,参与者分别对每种产品的危害性进行评分,然后比较评分结果。美国健康信息全国趋势调查(HINTS-FDA-2015;N = 3738)包括了与香烟相比,电子烟和SLT感知危害的直接测量方法。间接测量方法是通过比较电子烟、SLT和香烟在3分制量表上的危害评分而创建的。逻辑回归通过评估直接和间接测量方法是否与包括以下在内的标准变量相关来检验有效性:曾经尝试过电子烟、曾经尝试过口含烟,以及SLT使用状况。与间接测量方法相比,危害的直接测量方法与标准变量的相关性更一致。在直接测量中,26%的成年人认为电子烟的危害小于香烟,11%的人认为SLT的危害小于香烟。直接测量方法似乎能提供有关个人危害信念的有效信息,可用于为研究和烟草控制政策提供参考。鼓励开展进一步的验证研究。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

3
Validating the short gambling harm screen against external benchmarks.验证短时间赌博危害筛查对外部基准的有效性。
J Behav Addict. 2022 Oct 12;11(4):994-1001. doi: 10.1556/2006.2022.00075. Print 2022 Dec 27.
7
Measuring Cigarette Smoking Risk Perceptions.测量对吸烟风险的认知。
Nicotine Tob Res. 2020 Oct 29;22(11):1937-1945. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntz213.

本文引用的文献

5
Communicating tobacco product harm: Compared to what?传播烟草制品危害:与什么相比?
Addict Behav. 2016 Jan;52:123-5. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2015.06.039. Epub 2015 Jun 23.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验