OBJECTIVE: Susceptibility to cigarette smoking has been used since the mid-1990s as a measure to identify youth at risk of cigarette initiation. However, it is unclear how well this measure predicts future smoking among electronic (e-)cigarette or hookah users, or among those in tobacco-friendly social environments. METHODS: We used prospective data from the Southern California Children's Health Study to evaluate the performance (sensitivity, specificity, predictive value) of a composite index assessing susceptibility to smoking, and to evaluate whether performance of the measure differed by use of e-cigarettes or hookah, or immersion in a tobacco-friendly social environment. Susceptibility to cigarette smoking was measured in 11th/12th grade (2014) among never cigarette-smokers (N=1266); follow-up data on smoking initiation were obtained approximately 16 months later. RESULTS: Overall, 16.4% of youth initiated smoking between baseline and follow-up. The sensitivity of the susceptibility to smoking index was low (46.4%), and specificity was high (79.0%). No difference in sensitivity was observed by baseline e-cigarette use; specificity was higher among never e- cigarette users. Differences in negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were also observed by baseline e-cigarette and hookah use. Specificity was generally lower, and sensitivity was generally higher for those in tobacco-friendly social environments. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that use of the susceptibility to smoking index in cross-sectional studies of older adolescents to identify those likely to begin smoking may be inappropriate for those using alternative tobacco products (e.g., e-cigarettes or hookah).
OBJECTIVE: Susceptibility to cigarette smoking has been used since the mid-1990s as a measure to identify youth at risk of cigarette initiation. However, it is unclear how well this measure predicts future smoking among electronic (e-)cigarette or hookah users, or among those in tobacco-friendly social environments. METHODS: We used prospective data from the Southern California Children's Health Study to evaluate the performance (sensitivity, specificity, predictive value) of a composite index assessing susceptibility to smoking, and to evaluate whether performance of the measure differed by use of e-cigarettes or hookah, or immersion in a tobacco-friendly social environment. Susceptibility to cigarette smoking was measured in 11th/12th grade (2014) among never cigarette-smokers (N=1266); follow-up data on smoking initiation were obtained approximately 16 months later. RESULTS: Overall, 16.4% of youth initiated smoking between baseline and follow-up. The sensitivity of the susceptibility to smoking index was low (46.4%), and specificity was high (79.0%). No difference in sensitivity was observed by baseline e-cigarette use; specificity was higher among never e- cigarette users. Differences in negative predictive value (NPV) and positive predictive value (PPV) were also observed by baseline e-cigarette and hookah use. Specificity was generally lower, and sensitivity was generally higher for those in tobacco-friendly social environments. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that use of the susceptibility to smoking index in cross-sectional studies of older adolescents to identify those likely to begin smoking may be inappropriate for those using alternative tobacco products (e.g., e-cigarettes or hookah).
Authors: David R Strong; Sheri J Hartman; Jesse Nodora; Karen Messer; Lisa James; Martha White; David B Portnoy; Conrad J Choiniere; Genevieve C Vullo; John Pierce Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2014-12-06 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Tamika D Gilreath; Adam Leventhal; Jessica L Barrington-Trimis; Jennifer B Unger; Tess Boley Cruz; Kiros Berhane; Jimi Huh; Robert Urman; Kejia Wang; Steve Howland; Mary Ann Pentz; Chih Ping Chou; Rob McConnell Journal: J Adolesc Health Date: 2015-11-17 Impact factor: 5.012
Authors: Jessica L Barrington-Trimis; Kiros Berhane; Jennifer B Unger; Tess Boley Cruz; Jimi Huh; Adam M Leventhal; Robert Urman; Kejia Wang; Steve Howland; Tamika D Gilreath; Chih-Ping Chou; Mary Ann Pentz; Rob McConnell Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Thomas A Wills; James D Sargent; Frederick X Gibbons; Ian Pagano; Rebecca Schweitzer Journal: Tob Control Date: 2016-08-19 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Thomas A Wills; Rebecca Knight; James D Sargent; Frederick X Gibbons; Ian Pagano; Rebecca J Williams Journal: Tob Control Date: 2016-01-25 Impact factor: 7.552
Authors: Mignonne C Guy; Jacob Helt; Sherilyn Palafox; Kellie Green; Eric K Soule; Sarah F Maloney; Thomas Eissenberg; Pebbles Fagan Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2019-09-19 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Cheryl L Perry; MeLisa R Creamer; Benjamin W Chaffee; Jennifer B Unger; Erin L Sutfin; Grace Kong; Ce Shang; Stephanie L Clendennen; Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin; Mary Ann Pentz Journal: Nicotine Tob Res Date: 2020-06-12 Impact factor: 4.244
Authors: Matthew G Kirkpatrick; Tess Boley Cruz; Jennifer B Unger; Josseline Herrera; Sara Schiff; Jon-Patrick Allem Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2019-06-08 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Jessica L Barrington-Trimis; Fei Liu; Jennifer B Unger; Todd Alonzo; Tess Boley Cruz; Robert Urman; Mary Ann Pentz; Kiros Berhane; Rob McConnell Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2019-04-01 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Dale S Mantey; Onyinye Omega-Njemnobi; Felisa A Ruiz; Tara L Vaughn; Steven H Kelder; Andrew E Springer Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2020-12-24 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Doireann O'Brien; Jean Long; Joan Quigley; Caitriona Lee; Anne McCarthy; Paul Kavanagh Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-06-03 Impact factor: 3.295