Accuracy of the Smoking Questionnaire

Open access

Summary

The smoking questionnaire (SQ), a multidimensional questionnaire covering the major dimensions of cigarette smoking, was developed to address the heterogeneity in the assessment of smoking exposure. It consists of eight questions and can be completed within a few minutes. Test-retest reliability of the SQ and concurrent validity with the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2011 questionnaire were examined in a clinical study conducted in adult US current menthol cigarette smokers. The SQ and the BRFSS were self-administrated twice before and after randomization with a 6-day interval. The inter-temporal analyses included current smokers aged 22 to 66 years who completed the SQ at both timepoints. The percent agreement of items and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the comparisons between the two timepoints and between the SQ and the BRFSS questionnaire. To evaluate the feasibility of the SQ and to capture subjects’ opinions about the SQ, a meta-questionnaire was administrated. High test-retest reliability levels (percent agreement of > 70 to 100% between the two timepoints) were found for SQ smoking behavior items, in particular for items related to current smoking status, 100-cigarettes lifetime, regular smoking, age of initiation and preferred brand. Moderate (55% agreement) to high test-retest reliability (84% agreement) was found for daily consumption of manufactured cigarettes. The comparison between the SQ and the BRFSS 2011 showed a high concurrent validity (98 to 100% agreement). The SQ was completed on average in 3 to 4 min and was assessed as easy to use. The findings demonstrate that the SQ is reliable in smokers and a practical tool to assess smoking exposure in clinical studies.

1. Delnevo, C.D. and U.E. Bauer: Monitoring the Tobacco Use Epidemic III: The Host: Data Sources and Methodological Challenges; Prev. Med. 48 (2009) 16–23. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2008.09.008

2. Bogdanovica, I., F. Godfrey, A. McNeill, and J. Britton: Smoking Prevalence in the European Union: A Comparison of National and Transnational Prevalence Survey Methods and Results; Tob. Control 20 (2011) e4. DOI: 10.1136/tc.2010.036103

3. Zatonski, W., K. Przewozniak, U. Sulkowska, R. West, and A. Wojtyla: Tobacco Smoking in Countries of the European Union; Ann. Agric. Environ. Med. 19 (2012) 181–192.

4. Weitkunat, R., C.R.E. Coggins, Z. Sponsiello-Wang, G. Kallischnigg, and R. Dempsey: Assessment of Cigarette Smoking in Epidemiologic Studies; Beitr. Tabakforsch. Int. 25 (2013) 638–648. DOI: 10.2478/cttr-2013-0940

5. World Health Organization (WHO): Monitoring Tobacco Use; Guidelines for Controlling and Monitoring the Tobacco Epidemic, World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1998, pp. 76–101.

6. Center for Disease Control (CDC): Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Questionnaire (BRFSS) 2011; Available at https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=hdl:1902.1/12496 V2 [Version] Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/brfss/about/index.htm (2011) (both accessed November 2017).

7. Newcombe, R.G.: Two-sided Confidence Intervals for the Single Proportion: Comparison of Seven Methods; Stat. Med. 17 (1998) 857–872.

8. Lee, J.: Alternate Approaches for Quantifying Aggregate and Individual Agreements Between Two Methods for Assessing Dietary Intakes; Am. J. Clin. Nutr. 33 (1980) 956–958.

9. Roberts, J.M. and D.D. Brewer: Measures and Tests of Heaping in Discrete Quantitative Distributions; J. Appl. Stat. 28 (2001) 887–896. DOI: 10.1080/02664760120074960

10. Breslau, N.A.: Daily Cigarette Consumption in Early Adulthood: Age of Smoking Initiation and Duration of Smoking; Drug Alcohol Depend. 33 (1993) 287–291.

11. Brigham, J., C.N. Lessov-Schlaggar, H.S. Javitz, R.E. Krasnow, M. McElroy, and G.E. Swan: Test-Retest Reliability of Web-Based Retrospective Self-Report of Tobacco Exposure and Risk; J. Med. Internet Res. 11 (2009) e35. DOI: 10.2196/jmir.1248

12. Passaro, K.T., J. Noss, D.A. Savitz, and R.E. Little: Agreement Between Self and Partner Reports of Paternal Drinking and Smoking. The ALSPAC Study Team. Avon Longitudinal Study of Pregnancy and Childhood; Int. J. Epidemiol. 26 (1997) 315–320.

13. Hatch, M.C., D. Misra, G.C. Kabat, and S. Kartzmer: Proxy Respondents in Reproductive Research: a Comparison of Self- and Partner-Reported Data; Am. J. Epidemiol. 133 (1991) 826–831. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a115962

14. Brener, N.D., L. Kann, T. McManus, S.A. Kinchen, E.C. Sundberg, and J.G. Ross: Reliability of the 1999 Youth Risk Behavior Survey Questionnaire; J. Adolesc. Health 31 (2002) 336–342. DOI: 10.1016/S1054-139X(02)00339-7

15. Huerta, M., G. Chodick, R.D. Balicer, N. Davidovitch, and I. Grotto: Reliability of Self-Reported Smoking History and Age at Initial Tobacco Use; Prev. Med. 41 (2005) 646–650. DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2005.01.011

16. Wang, H., S. Shiffman, S.D. Griffith, and D.F. Heitjan: Truth and Memory: Linking Instantaneous and Retrospective Self-Reported Cigarette Consumption; Ann. Appl. Stat. 6 (2012) 1689–1706. DOI: 10.1214/12-AOAS557

17. Dudai, Y., A. Karni, and J. Born: The Consolidation and Transformation of Memory; Neuron 88 (2015) 20–32. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2015.09.004

18. Janssen, S.M., D.C. Rubin, and P.L. St. Jacques: The Temporal Distribution of Autobiographical Memory: Changes in Reliving and Vividness Over the Life Span Do Not Explain the Reminiscence Bump; Mem. Cognit. 39 (2011) 1–11. DOI: 10.3758/s13421-010-0003-x

19. Cohen, G., N. Stanhope, and M. Conway: How Long Does Education Last? Very Long Term Retention of Cognitive Psychology; Psychologist 5 (1992) 57–60.

20. Johnson, T.P. and J.A. Mott: The Reliability of Self-Reported Age of Onset of Tobacco, Alcohol and Illicit Drug Use; Addiction 96 (2001) 1187–1198. DOI: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2001.968118711.x

21. Hayes, J.R. and J.A. Hatch: Issues in Measuring Reliability: Correlation Versus Percentage of Agreement; Writ. Commun. 16 (1999) 354–367. DOI: 10.1177/0741088399016003004

22. Chen, G., P. Faris, B. Hemmelgarn, R.L. Walker, and H. Quan: Measuring Agreement of Administrative Data with Chart Data Using Prevalence Unadjusted and Adjusted Kappa; BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 9 (2009) 5. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-9-5

23. Cicchetti, D.V. and A.R. Feinstein: High Agreement but Low Kappa: II. Resolving the Paradoxes; J. Clin. Epidemiol. 43 (1990) 551–558. DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(90)90159-M

24. Feinstein, A.R. and D.V. Cicchetti: High Agreement but Low Kappa: I. The Problems of Two Paradoxes; J. Clin. Epidemiol. 43 (1990) 543–549. DOI: 10.1016/0895-4356(90)90158-L

25. Shiffman, S., M. Hufford, M. Hickcox, J.A. Paty, M. Gnys, and J.D. Kassel: Remember That? A Comparison of Real-Time Versus Retrospective Recall of Smoking Lapses; J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 65 (1997) 292–300. DOI: 10.1037/0022-006X.65.2.292.a

26. Conway, M.A. and C. Loveday: Remembering, Imagining, False Memories & Personal Meanings; Conscious. Cogn. 33 (2015) 574–581. DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.12.002

27. Reimer, M. and B. Matthes: Collecting Event Histories with Truetales: Techniques to Improve Autobiographical Recall Problems in Standardized Interviews; Qual. Quant. 41 (2007) 711–735. DOI: 10.1007/s11135-006-9021-y

Journal Information


CiteScore 2017: 0.63

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.309
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 0.403

Cited By

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 262 262 40
PDF Downloads 137 137 22