Self‐efficacy with application to adolescent smoking cessation: a concept analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This paper is a report of a concept analysis of adolescent smoking cessation self-efficacy. BACKGROUND: Smoking cessation is a key preventive care/health promotion strategy offered by nurses worldwide. Most programming is tailored to adults although the reasons for smoking, along with coping strategies, resources and developmental stage, differ in adolescence. Understanding of the concept of self-efficacy as it relates to the adolescent population will assist nurses in addressing smoking cessation behaviours with this population. DATA SOURCES: The CINAHL and Proquest Nursing databases were searched for papers published between 1977 and 2007 using the keywords self-efficacy, adolescents and smoking cessation. The Walker and Avant method of concept analysis was applied. FINDINGS: Adolescent smoking cessation self-efficacy is the confidence, perceived capacity and perceived ability that the teen possesses to quit smoking. Identified antecedents include developmental stage, past life support, emotional support, coping strategies, resources and emotional status. Consequences are smoking cessation: positive or negative. Empirical measures are identified. CONCLUSION: Levels of self-efficacy have been shown to be an important consideration in the approach of nurses to smoking cessation counselling with the adolescent client. The theoretical definition for this concept will provide the basis for nurses to design appropriate interventions for use in smoking cessation programmes targeted to adolescents. This definition identifies the key attributes of this concept that should be addressed when caring for this population.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".