Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Nicotine Tob Res. 2018 Jan 2. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntx271. [Epub ahead of print]

Psychometric evaluation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Nicotine Dependence Item Bank for use with electronic cigarettes.

Author information

1
Department of Psychology, Oberlin College, Oberlin, OH.
2
Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT.
3
Institute for Health Promotion & Disease Prevention Research, University of Southern California, MC, Los Angeles, CA.
4
Penn State Tobacco Center of Regulatory Science, Penn State University, College of Medicine, Hershey, PA.
5
Health Sector, Westat, Rockville, Maryland.
6
Tobacco Control Research Branch, Behavioral Research Program, Division of Cancer Control and Population Sciences, National Cancer Institute, Rockville, MD.

Abstract

Introduction:

Psychometrically sound measures of e-cigarette dependence are lacking.

Methods:

We modified the PROMIS Nicotine Dependence Item Banks for use with e-cigarettes and evaluated the psychometrics of the 22-, 8- and 4-item adapted versions. 1009 adults 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 PROMIS-E versions had confirmable, internally consistent latent structures that were scalar invariant by sex, race, e-cigarette use (non-daily/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 PROMIS-E 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 PROMIS-E 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 PROMIS-E, which provides an efficient assessment of e-cigarette dependence.

Implications:

The availability of the novel, psychometrically sound PROMIS-E can further research on a wide range of questions related to e-cigarette use and dependence. In addition, the overlap between the PROMIS-E and the original PROMIS that was developed for assessing nicotine dependence to cigarettes provides consistency within the field.

PMID:
29301008
DOI:
10.1093/ntr/ntx271

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Silverchair Information Systems
Loading ...
Support Center