Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of Dependence Measures for Exclusive Electronic Cigarette Users.
Evaluation of the Psychometric Properties of Dependence Measures for Exclusive Electronic Cigarette Users.
复制标题
专门电子烟使用者依赖测量的心理测量特性评估。
DOI：
10.1093/ntr/ntac260
复制
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Blank,MelissaD
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Milstred,AndreaR;Douglas,AshleyE;Romm,KatelynF;Blank,MelissaD
IntroductionExtant electronic cigarette（ECIG）dependence measures are mostly adapted from those designed for cigarette smoking，though few have been evaluated for their psychometric properties.Aims and MethodsNever smoking ECIG users（N= 134）participating in an online survey completed four dependence measures：宾夕法尼亚州立大学电子烟依赖指数（PSECDI），电子烟依赖量表（EDS-4），烟草使用障碍诊断和统计手册（DSM-5），和格洛弗尼尔森行为问卷（GNBQ）。结果EDS-4的内部一致性最高（Cronbach's α= 0.88），其次是GNBQ（α= 0.75）、PSECDI（α= 0.72）和DSM（α= 0.71）。解释性因素分析显示，PSECDI，EDS-4和GNBQ的单因素结构。然而，对于DSM-5，有两个项目没有显著加载（ECIG的使用干扰了责任;由于ECIG的使用而减少/放弃活动）。所有测量结果与使用ECIG的ECIG使用天数/周数和/或年数之间以及DSM-5评分与ECIG戒烟尝试次数和起始年龄之间均存在显著相关性。背书使用ECIGs，因为“我喜欢的口味”呈正相关DSM-5和GNBQ scores.ConclusionsAll依赖措施，在此评估表现出足够的可靠性和结构效度。未来的工作应集中在确定哪些方面的依赖是那些独特的ECIG使用，并随后开发一个更全面的措施ECIG dependence.ImplicationsThe措施评估ESTA-PSECDI，EDS-4，DSM-5，和GNBQ-证明足够的样本中从不吸烟的ECIG用户良好的可靠性和结构效度。各项措施所涵盖的依赖领域相互关联，但又各不相同。研究结果表明，未来需要对这些不同的领域进行评估，以确定哪些是ECIG依赖的最显著特征。
IntroductionExtant electronic cigarette (ECIG) dependence measures are largely adapted from those designed for cigarette smoking, though few have been evaluated for their psychometric properties.Aims and MethodsNever-smoking ECIG users (N= 134) participating in an online survey completed four dependence measures: Penn state electronic cigarette dependence index (PSECDI), e-cigarette dependence scale (EDS-4), diagnostic and statistical manual for tobacco use disorder (DSM-5), and Glover Nilsson behavioral questionnaire (GNBQ). They also reported on their ECIG use characteristics (eg, behaviors and reasons).ResultsInternal consistency was highest for the EDS-4 (Cronbach’sα= 0.88) followed by the GNBQ (α= 0.75), PSECDI (α= 0.72), and DSM (α= 0.71). Confirmatory factor analyses revealed a single-factor structure for the PSECDI, EDS-4, and GNBQ. For the DSM-5, however, two items did not load significantly (ECIG use interferes with responsibilities; reduce/give up activities because of ECIG use). Significant correlations were observed between all measures and the number of ECIG use days/week and/or years using ECIGs, as well as between DSM-5 scores and the number of ECIG quit attempts and initiation age. Endorsement of using ECIGs because “I like flavors” was correlated positively with DSM-5 and GNBQ scores.ConclusionsAll dependence measures evaluated herein demonstrated adequate reliability and construct validity. Future work should focus on determining which aspects of dependence are those that are unique to ECIG use, and subsequently developing a more comprehensive measure of ECIG dependence.ImplicationsThe measures assessed herein—PSECDI, EDS-4, DSM-5, and GNBQ—demonstrated adequate to good reliability and construct validity among a sample of never-smoking ECIG users. The dependence domains covered across measures were related yet distinct. Findings demonstrate the need for future evaluation of these different domains to determine which are the most salient characteristics of ECIG dependence.