Measures of nicotine dependence in adolescents: An update of the evidence 2000–2010
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nicotine withdrawal and the compulsion to use tobacco resulting from withdrawal form the core clinical features of nicotine dependence (ND). However, some ND measures show little or no content overlap with these clinical features. Our objective was to review the content and psychometric properties of available measures of ND for youth. A literature search identified 27 English language articles published in 2000–2010 that evaluated ND measures in adolescents or young adults. A consensus process among the authors was used to establish if each item in each measure assessed withdrawal or compulsion, or if the item tapped other aspects of cigarette smoking including tolerance, harm, triggers for smoking, cigarette use patterns, prioritizing smoking, perceived utility, or attitudes about smoking. Out of 14 measures identified, three (Hooked on Nicotine Checklist, Latency to Withdrawal, Withdrawal Symptom Cluster) measured the core clinical features of ND; six (Autonomy Over Smoking Scale, DSM IV, Dimensions of Tobacco Dependence Scale, ICD-10 Tobacco Dependence, ND/Cravings Symptom Cluster, Nicotine Dependence Syndrome Scale) measured withdrawal/compulsion and other aspects of smoking; and five (Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence, Modified Fagerström Tolerance Questionnaire, Nicotine Dependence Scale for Adolescents, Self-Medication Symptom Cluster, Stanford Dependence Index) had few or no withdrawal/compulsion indicators. Existing measures vary widely in the degree to which they assess the known clinical features of ND. Attempts to assess ND indirectly in youth by measuring other aspects of smoking may result in inaccuracy if items are endorsed for reasons other than ND. No existing measure assesses the full spectrum of clinically recognized features of ND.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.019 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".