scholarly journals Exploring the Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS) as a possible measure of nicotine dependence

2015 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 323-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa Mercincavage ◽  
Joshua M. Smyth ◽  
Steven A. Branstetter ◽  
Delwyn Catley
2014 ◽  
Vol 114 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Caterina Grassi ◽  
Domenico Enea ◽  
Amy K. Ferketich ◽  
Franco Culasso ◽  
Paolo Nencini

The objective was to test the psychometric properties of an Italian version of the Severity of Dependence Scale, a five-item measure designed to assess the compulsive dimension of drug dependence. 635 smokers enrolled in a tobacco dependence treatment program served as the participants. The Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence was used as a comparative measure. Dimensionality of the Severity of Dependence Scale and the Fagerström Test for Nicotine Dependence was assessed by factor analysis. Prediction of smoking at one year was evaluated by logistic regression. Factor analysis yielded a two-factor solution; however, the second factor explained very little variance. Factor 1 had a Cronbach's α of .66 (overall Scale coefficient = .44). The total Severity of Dependence Score predicted smoking at one year (OR = 1.10).


2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. 1556-1564 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meghan E Morean ◽  
Suchitra Krishnan-Sarin ◽  
Steve Sussman ◽  
Jonathan Foulds ◽  
Howard Fishbein ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Psychometrically sound measures of e-cigarette dependence are lacking. Methods We modified the PROMIS Item Bank v1.0—Smoking: Nicotine Dependence for All Smokers for use with e-cigarettes and evaluated the psychometrics of the 22-, 8-, and 4-item adapted versions, referred to as The E-cigarette dependence scale (EDS). Adults (1009) who reported using e-cigarettes at least weekly completed an anonymous survey in summer 2016 (50.2% male, 77.1% White, mean age 35.81 [10.71], 66.4% daily e-cigarette users, 72.6% current cigarette smokers). Psychometric analyses included confirmatory factor analysis, internal consistency, measurement invariance, examination of mean-level differences, convergent validity, and test-criterion relationships with e-cigarette use outcomes. Results All EDS versions had confirmable, internally consistent latent structures that were scalar invariant by sex, race, e-cigarette use (nondaily/daily), e-liquid nicotine content (no/yes), and current cigarette smoking status (no/yes). Daily e-cigarette users, nicotine e-liquid users, and cigarette smokers reported being more dependent on e-cigarettes than their counterparts. All EDS versions correlated strongly with one another, evidenced convergent validity with the Penn State E-cigarette Dependence Index and time to first e-cigarette use in the morning, and evidenced test-criterion relationships with vaping frequency, e-liquid nicotine concentration, and e-cigarette quit attempts. Similar results were observed when analyses were conducted within subsamples of exclusive e-cigarette users and duals-users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes. Conclusions Each EDS version evidenced strong psychometric properties for assessing e-cigarette dependence in adults who either use e-cigarette exclusively or who are dual-users of cigarettes and e-cigarettes. However, results indicated little benefit of the longer versions over the 4-item EDS, which provides an efficient assessment of e-cigarette dependence. Implications The availability of the novel, psychometrically sound EDS can further research on a wide range of questions related to e-cigarette use and dependence. In addition, the overlap between the EDS and the original PROMIS that was developed for assessing nicotine dependence to cigarettes provides consistency within the field.


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (6) ◽  
pp. 671
Author(s):  
AzizUr Rahman ◽  
MohamadHaniki Nik Mohamed ◽  
Shazia Jamshed ◽  
Syed Mahmood ◽  
MuhammadAhsan Iftikhar Baig

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Deluca ◽  
Michelle Foley ◽  
Jacklyn Dunne ◽  
Andreas Kimergård

Objective: Investigate the psychometric properties of the Severity of Dependence Scale (SDS) for codeine and its association with aberrant codeine related behaviors.Design: A voluntary and uncompensated cross-sectional online survey.Setting: Online population (≥18 years).Respondents: Two hundred and eighty-six respondents (66% women) who had used codeine containing medicines in the last 3 months and were living in the UK.Results: Of the respondents (mean age = 35.4 years, SD = 12.5), more than half were employed. Only 3.5% respondents reported no income. The majority of respondents (45.1%) primarily obtained prescription-only codeine from a consultation with a health professional, whilst 40.9% mainly purchased “over-the-counter” codeine containing medicines in a pharmacy without a medical prescription. Principal component analysis indicated a single factor solution accounting for 75% of the variance. Factor loadings ranged from 0.83 to 0.89. Cronbach's Alpha was high (α = 0.92). Several behaviors relating to codeine use were found to significantly predict probable codeine dependence. These included: daily codeine use in the last 3 months (OR = 66.89, 95% CI = 15.8–283.18); tolerance to codeine (OR = 32.14, 95% CI = 13.82–74.75); problems with role responsibility due to intoxication (OR = 9.89, 95% CI = 4.95–19.78); having sought advice on the internet to manage codeine use (OR = 9.56, 95% CI = 4.5–20.31); history of alcohol or drug treatment (OR = 3.73, 95% CI = 1.88–7.43).Conclusions: The SDS was acceptable and feasible to use to assess probable psychological codeine dependence in an online sample of people using codeine containing medicines. SDS scores were associated with behaviors known to be indicators of codeine dependence. Studies are needed in well-defined populations of people who use codeine to test the different aspects of psychometry of the scale compared against “gold standard” criterion [a diagnosis according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5)].


2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Socheat Cheng ◽  
Tahreem Ghazal Siddiqui ◽  
Michael Gossop ◽  
Espen Saxhaug Kristoffersen ◽  
Christofer Lundqvist

2008 ◽  
Vol 43 (7) ◽  
pp. 919-935 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisco González-Saiz ◽  
Óscar M. Lozano ◽  
Rosario Ballesta ◽  
Teresa Silva ◽  
Maria Teresa Brugal ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document