2009
DOI: 10.1093/ntr/ntp083
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of methods for measurement of smoking behavior: Mouthpiece-based computerized devices versus direct observation

Abstract: a convenient and useful tool for researchers examining smoking topography. IntroductionDetailed examination of smoking behavior has been of interest for decades (e.g., Djordjevic, Hoffman, & Hoffman, 1997 ;Donny, Houtsmuller, & Stitzer, 2007 ;Epstein et al., 1982 ;Robinson & Forbes, 1975). It involves quantitative measurement of puff topography: number of puffs/cigarette, puff duration (milliseconds), puff volume (milliliters), and interpuff interval (IPI; time between successive puffs, in seconds). The abilit… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

5
167
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 107 publications
(172 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
5
167
0
Order By: Relevance
“…These tests include the most commonly used electrochemical sensor devices, breathalysers and transdermal (sweat) sensors, to detect ethanol (alcohol), and saliva thiocyanate (SCN) analysis (Leffingwell et al 2013;Luepker et al 1981), or Mouthpiece-based computerized devices (Blank et al 2009) to document smoking. Since the objective measures of substance use are more valid, researchers usually use them as an external validation for the objective measures and the discordance between selfreport and biological measures is generally assumed to reflect biases in selfreport due to social desirability (Dolcini et al 1996).…”
Section: Measurements Of Alcohol Use and Smokingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These tests include the most commonly used electrochemical sensor devices, breathalysers and transdermal (sweat) sensors, to detect ethanol (alcohol), and saliva thiocyanate (SCN) analysis (Leffingwell et al 2013;Luepker et al 1981), or Mouthpiece-based computerized devices (Blank et al 2009) to document smoking. Since the objective measures of substance use are more valid, researchers usually use them as an external validation for the objective measures and the discordance between selfreport and biological measures is generally assumed to reflect biases in selfreport due to social desirability (Dolcini et al 1996).…”
Section: Measurements Of Alcohol Use and Smokingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The tested puff volumes and duration were chosen to encompass standard machine smoking regimens, such as Cambridge Filter Method (35), Massachusetts Department of Health (36), and Health Canada (37), and the range of values reported in the literature (29,31). The CReSSmicro™ device uses a fixed orifice design in which airflow creates a pressure difference which is detected by a pressure transducer.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A cigarette is inserted into one side of the device and the user puffs from the opposite side of the device. With widespread reported use in the literature, it is surprising that there have only been four published studies designed to assess reliability and validity of cigarette puff data collected with the CReSSmicro™ and bench-top devices (29)(30)(31)(32). LEE et al (29) conducted two small clinical trials with the first comparing puff volume, puff duration, inter-puff interval and maximum puff velocity as measured by a CReSS device (portable or bench-top device not specified) on four different days in seven smokers.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Information on individual puffs with high precision (up to 1/100 second) can be extracted from topographic data, including total puffs, puff duration, inter-puff interval, frequency and speed of inhalation, hold, exhalation and rest. Topography measures are shown to be reliable in distinguishing different smokers 20 , and associated with nicotine dependence measures, such as cotinine levels 21 . These prior findings provide impetus to explore the utility of smoking topography in assessing nicotine dependence 22 .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%