A Measure of Illness Awareness in Individuals With Nicotine Dependence—Nicotine Use Awareness and Insight Scale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Impaired illness awareness or the inability to recognize that one has a dependence on nicotine may be a major barrier to seeking cessation treatment. To better understand the role of impaired illness awareness on treatment-seeking behavior and clinical outcomes, we developed and examined the psychometric properties of a novel scale measuring illness awareness in individuals with dependence on nicotine. AIMS AND METHODS: We developed the Nicotine Use Awareness and Insight Scale (NAS), a 7-item self-report measure to assess the theoretical construct of illness awareness in individuals with dependence on nicotine (www.illnessawarenessscales.com). Data from participants 18 years of age or older were collected via a web-based survey company, Dynata. Participants with moderate dependence on nicotine were included, defined by a score of four or more on the Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence (FTCD) or the FTCD adapted for electronic cigarettes (eFTCD). RESULTS: A total of 100 participants (mean [SD] age = 49.1 [16.1] years, 52% women) that met the inclusion criteria for either FTCD (n = 50) or eFTCD (n = 50) were included. The NAS demonstrated good convergent (r = .74, p < .001) and discriminant validity (r = .03, p = .786). It also demonstrated good internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.78) and one-month test-retest reliability (intra-class correlation = 0.86). An exploratory factor analysis yielded the retention of two components. CONCLUSIONS: The NAS is a novel scale to asses illness awareness in individuals with dependence on nicotine. This study provides initial support for the psychometric validity and reliability of NAS. IMPLICATIONS: The NAS may be used in research and clinical practice to evaluate the impact of impaired illness awareness on treatment-seeking behavior and clinical outcomes.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".