Comparative Analysis of Alternate Measures of Readiness to Quit Smoking: Stages of Change and the Contemplation Ladder

IF 5.1 Q1 SUBSTANCE ABUSE
Kelsey Miskimins, Amanda Kaufmann, David Haaga
{"title":"Comparative Analysis of Alternate Measures of Readiness to Quit Smoking: Stages of Change and the Contemplation Ladder","authors":"Kelsey Miskimins, Amanda Kaufmann, David Haaga","doi":"10.2147/SAR.S440691","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose Two methods of operationalizing readiness to quit smoking have been used extensively in prior research. An algorithm derived from the transtheoretical model classifies current smokers in distinct stages of precontemplation (not intending to quit in next 6 months), contemplation (serious intent to quit within 6 months), and preparation (serious intent to quit within 30 days). The Contemplation Ladder (CL) is a single-item continuous (0–10) rating. The current study, a secondary analysis of a clinical trial testing a method of inducing quit attempts, examined the convergent validity, one-month retest reliability, and predictive validity (for quit attempts) of the CL and the stages of change algorithm. Patients and Methods Adult daily smokers (≥10 cigarettes/day; N = 278) completed the CL and stage of change algorithm measures and underwent an experimental manipulation intended to induce quit attempts. Four weeks later they completed the same measures and reported on whether they had attempted to quit smoking in the interim. Results The CL and the staging algorithm showed strong convergent validity, with intercorrelations of 0.50 and 0.51 at baseline and follow-up assessments. Retest reliability was similar for each measure (CL r = 0.52; stage of change r = 0.57). Each showed predictive validity in that smokers who went on to make a quit attempt had scored significantly higher at baseline in readiness to quit. Conclusion Researchers and clinicians can reasonably choose either measure of readiness to quit smoking with confidence that the results would parallel what would have been obtained with the other.","PeriodicalId":22060,"journal":{"name":"Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Substance Abuse and Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/SAR.S440691","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose Two methods of operationalizing readiness to quit smoking have been used extensively in prior research. An algorithm derived from the transtheoretical model classifies current smokers in distinct stages of precontemplation (not intending to quit in next 6 months), contemplation (serious intent to quit within 6 months), and preparation (serious intent to quit within 30 days). The Contemplation Ladder (CL) is a single-item continuous (0–10) rating. The current study, a secondary analysis of a clinical trial testing a method of inducing quit attempts, examined the convergent validity, one-month retest reliability, and predictive validity (for quit attempts) of the CL and the stages of change algorithm. Patients and Methods Adult daily smokers (≥10 cigarettes/day; N = 278) completed the CL and stage of change algorithm measures and underwent an experimental manipulation intended to induce quit attempts. Four weeks later they completed the same measures and reported on whether they had attempted to quit smoking in the interim. Results The CL and the staging algorithm showed strong convergent validity, with intercorrelations of 0.50 and 0.51 at baseline and follow-up assessments. Retest reliability was similar for each measure (CL r = 0.52; stage of change r = 0.57). Each showed predictive validity in that smokers who went on to make a quit attempt had scored significantly higher at baseline in readiness to quit. Conclusion Researchers and clinicians can reasonably choose either measure of readiness to quit smoking with confidence that the results would parallel what would have been obtained with the other.
戒烟准备度量方法的比较分析:变化阶段和沉思阶梯
目的在以往的研究中,有两种方法被广泛应用于实施戒烟准备。从跨理论模型衍生出的算法将当前吸烟者分为不同的阶段:预考虑(不打算在未来6个月内戒烟)、考虑(6个月内严重打算戒烟)和准备(30天内严重打算戒烟)。沉思阶梯(CL)是一个单项连续等级(0-10)。本研究是对一种诱导戒烟方法的临床试验的二次分析,检验了CL和变化阶段算法的收敛效度、一个月重测信度和预测效度(对于戒烟尝试)。成人日常吸烟者(≥10支/天;N = 278)完成了CL和变化阶段算法测量,并进行了旨在诱导戒烟尝试的实验操作。四周后,他们完成了同样的测量,并报告了他们在此期间是否试图戒烟。结果CL和分期算法具有较强的收敛效度,基线和随访时的相关系数分别为0.50和0.51。各测量的重测信度相似(CL r = 0.52;变化阶段r = 0.57)。每一项研究都显示出预测有效性,即那些继续尝试戒烟的吸烟者在准备戒烟的基线上得分明显更高。研究人员和临床医生可以合理地选择任何一种戒烟准备程度的测量方法,并确信结果与另一种方法的结果相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
审稿时长
16 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信