We have located links that may give you full text access.
Journal Article
Observational Study
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Abstinence expectancies and quit attempts.
Addictive Behaviors 2016 December
INTRODUCTION: Several scales have been developed to measure expectancies about smoking cessation. This secondary analysis tested the reliability and validity of one of the most commonly used expectancy measures - the Perceived Risks and Benefits of Quitting Scale (PRBQ).
METHODS: Smokers (n=143) who planned to quit at some point in the next 3months entered an observational study in which they called an Interactive Voice Response system nightly for 3months to report quit attempts and abstinence. They completed the PRBQ at baseline and the end of 1, 2 and 3months. No treatment was provided.
RESULTS: The Risks scores and Benefit scores of the PRBQ had high internal reliability (alpha=0.88-0.96 across administrations) and high test-retest stability (ICC=0.67-0.80), but poor to moderate concurrent validity (correlation with other cessation measures=0.09-0.52), and poor predictive validity (no significant prediction of quit attempts or duration of abstinence). Results were similar for men and women.
CONCLUSIONS: The PRBQ appears to be reliable but, similar to other scales of cessation expectancies, its validity appears to be poor. The face valid notion that expectations influence quitting requires further testing.
METHODS: Smokers (n=143) who planned to quit at some point in the next 3months entered an observational study in which they called an Interactive Voice Response system nightly for 3months to report quit attempts and abstinence. They completed the PRBQ at baseline and the end of 1, 2 and 3months. No treatment was provided.
RESULTS: The Risks scores and Benefit scores of the PRBQ had high internal reliability (alpha=0.88-0.96 across administrations) and high test-retest stability (ICC=0.67-0.80), but poor to moderate concurrent validity (correlation with other cessation measures=0.09-0.52), and poor predictive validity (no significant prediction of quit attempts or duration of abstinence). Results were similar for men and women.
CONCLUSIONS: The PRBQ appears to be reliable but, similar to other scales of cessation expectancies, its validity appears to be poor. The face valid notion that expectations influence quitting requires further testing.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app