BACKGROUND: The "cigarette susceptibility index" has been adapted for other products, yet, the validity of these adapted measures-particularly among youth who have used other tobacco products-has not been evaluated. METHODS: We used prospective data from the Southern California Children's Health Study to evaluate the association of questionnaire measures assessing susceptibility to e-cigarette, cigarette, hookah and cigar/cigarillo/little cigar use at wave 1 (W1; 11th/12th grade) with subsequent initiation between W1 and W2 (16 months later, N = 1453). We additionally examined whether each effect estimate differed by use of other tobacco products at W1. RESULTS: Odds ratios, attributable risk%, and risk differences for product initiation among susceptible vs. non-susceptible youth were consistently higher among never users of any tobacco product than among youth with any tobacco use history. For example, susceptible (vs. non-susceptible) youth with no prior tobacco use had 3.64 times the odds of subsequent initiation of e-cigarettes (95%CI:2.61,5.09), while among users of another product, susceptible (vs. non-susceptible) youth had 1.95 times the odds of e-cigarette initiation (95%CI:0.98,3.89; p-interaction = 0.016). 60.4% of e-cigarette initiation among never users of any product could be attributed to susceptibility, compared to 19.8% among users of another product. The e-cigarette absolute risk difference between susceptible and non-susceptible youth was 21.9%(15.2,28.6) for never users, vs. 15.4%(0.2,30.7) for users of another product. CONCLUSION: Tobacco product-specific susceptibility associations with initiation of use at W2 were markedly attenuated among prior users of other products, demonstrating reduced utility for these measures among subjects using other products.
BACKGROUND: The "cigarette susceptibility index" has been adapted for other products, yet, the validity of these adapted measures-particularly among youth who have used other tobacco products-has not been evaluated. METHODS: We used prospective data from the Southern California Children's Health Study to evaluate the association of questionnaire measures assessing susceptibility to e-cigarette, cigarette, hookah and cigar/cigarillo/little cigar use at wave 1 (W1; 11th/12th grade) with subsequent initiation between W1 and W2 (16 months later, N = 1453). We additionally examined whether each effect estimate differed by use of other tobacco products at W1. RESULTS: Odds ratios, attributable risk%, and risk differences for product initiation among susceptible vs. non-susceptible youth were consistently higher among never users of any tobacco product than among youth with any tobacco use history. For example, susceptible (vs. non-susceptible) youth with no prior tobacco use had 3.64 times the odds of subsequent initiation of e-cigarettes (95%CI:2.61,5.09), while among users of another product, susceptible (vs. non-susceptible) youth had 1.95 times the odds of e-cigarette initiation (95%CI:0.98,3.89; p-interaction = 0.016). 60.4% of e-cigarette initiation among never users of any product could be attributed to susceptibility, compared to 19.8% among users of another product. The e-cigarette absolute risk difference between susceptible and non-susceptible youth was 21.9%(15.2,28.6) for never users, vs. 15.4%(0.2,30.7) for users of another product. CONCLUSION:Tobacco product-specific susceptibility associations with initiation of use at W2 were markedly attenuated among prior users of other products, demonstrating reduced utility for these measures among subjects using other products.
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: Jessica L Barrington-Trimis; Adam M Leventhal; Todd A Alonzo; Tess Boley Cruz; Robert Urman; Feifei Liu; Mary Ann Pentz; Jennifer B Unger; Rob McConnell Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2017-08-31 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Jesse Nodora; Sheri J Hartman; David R Strong; Karen Messer; Lisa E Vera; Martha M White; David B Portnoy; Conrad J Choiniere; Genevieve C Vullo; John P Pierce Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2014-06-18 Impact factor: 3.913
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: Rob McConnell; Kiros Berhane; Ling Yao; Michael Jerrett; Fred Lurmann; Frank Gilliland; Nino Künzli; Jim Gauderman; Ed Avol; Duncan Thomas; John Peters Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2006-05 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Adriana Pérez; Arnold E Kuk; Meagan A Bluestein; Melissa B Harrell; Cheryl L Perry; Baojiang Chen Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2021-01-21 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Steven H Kelder; Dale S Mantey; Duncan Van Dusen; Tara Vaughn; Marcella Bianco; Andrew E Springer Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2020-10-10 Impact factor: 3.913
Authors: Baojiang Chen; Kymberle L Sterling; Meagan A Bluestein; Arnold E Kuk; Melissa B Harrell; Cheryl L Perry; Adriana Pérez Journal: PLoS One Date: 2020-12-09 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Adriana Pérez; Meagan A Bluestein; Arnold E Kuk; Baojiang Chen; Kymberle L Sterling; Melissa B Harrell Journal: Tob Use Insights Date: 2021-12-13
Authors: Dorota Kaleta; Mirosław Niedzin; Agnieszka Jankowska; Kinga Polańska Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 3.390