Julie C Gass1, Lisa J Germeroth1, Jennifer M Wray1, Stephen T Tiffany2. 1. Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY. 2. Department of Psychology, University at Buffalo, State University of New York, Buffalo, NY stiffany@buffalo.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Puff topography variables, often measured using the Clinical Research Support System device, have traditionally been studied in regular, daily smokers and have been shown to be highly stable. However, more recent research has focused on non-daily smokers as a population of interest. As such, the aim of this article was to examine puff topography stability (cross-cigarette agreement over time) and reliability (within-cigarette consistency) in non-daily smokers across six laboratory sessions. METHODS: One hundred seven non-daily smokers attended six laboratory sessions over the course of 3 months. At each session, they smoked one cigarette through the Clinical Research Support System pocket, in addition to completing questionnaires about their smoking history and dependence. RESULTS: Puff topography measurements were highly reliable (α values ranged from 0.87-0.95) and puff behavior was highly stable across sessions (r values ranged from 0.38-0.84). Adding sessions substantially improved reliability estimates. Aspects of puffing behavior observed in session, including puff volume, puff duration, time of puff peak, and total cigarette volume were related to level of smoke exposure, measured by expired carbon monoxide. Instability in puffing behavior was not predicted by recent or long-term smoking patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Puff topography appears to be a stable and routinized aspect of smoking in non-daily smokers. The feasibility of assessing puff topography in this population is supported by the high reliabilities observed, though it should be noted that reliability greatly improved by having more than one session.
INTRODUCTION: Puff topography variables, often measured using the Clinical Research Support System device, have traditionally been studied in regular, daily smokers and have been shown to be highly stable. However, more recent research has focused on non-daily smokers as a population of interest. As such, the aim of this article was to examine puff topography stability (cross-cigarette agreement over time) and reliability (within-cigarette consistency) in non-daily smokers across six laboratory sessions. METHODS: One hundred seven non-daily smokers attended six laboratory sessions over the course of 3 months. At each session, they smoked one cigarette through the Clinical Research Support System pocket, in addition to completing questionnaires about their smoking history and dependence. RESULTS: Puff topography measurements were highly reliable (α values ranged from 0.87-0.95) and puff behavior was highly stable across sessions (r values ranged from 0.38-0.84). Adding sessions substantially improved reliability estimates. Aspects of puffing behavior observed in session, including puff volume, puff duration, time of puff peak, and total cigarette volume were related to level of smoke exposure, measured by expired carbon monoxide. Instability in puffing behavior was not predicted by recent or long-term smoking patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Puff topography appears to be a stable and routinized aspect of smoking in non-daily smokers. The feasibility of assessing puff topography in this population is supported by the high reliabilities observed, though it should be noted that reliability greatly improved by having more than one session.
Authors: Megan E Piper; Thomas M Piasecki; E Belle Federman; Daniel M Bolt; Stevens S Smith; Michael C Fiore; Timothy B Baker Journal: J Consult Clin Psychol Date: 2004-04
Authors: David Hammond; Geoffrey T Fong; K Michael Cummings; Andrew Hyland Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Andrew Hyland; Hamed Rezaishiraz; Joseph Bauer; Gary A Giovino; K Michael Cummings Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: D J Rohsenow; P M Monti; S M Colby; S B Gulliver; A D Sirota; R S Niaura; D B Abrams Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 1997-02 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Jamie Arndt; Kenneth E Vail; Cathy R Cox; Jamie L Goldenberg; Thomas M Piasecki; Frederick X Gibbons Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Melissa Mercincavage; Joshua L Karelitz; Catherine L Kreider; Valentina Souprountchouk; Benjamin Albelda; Andrew A Strasser Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2021-02-17 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Devan R Romero; Kim Pulvers; Erika Carter; Casey Barber; Nora Satybaldiyeva; Thomas E Novotny; Eyal Oren Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-11-12 Impact factor: 3.390