4.6 Article

Comparison of five measures of motivation to cult smoking among a sample of hospitalized smokers

Journal

JOURNAL OF GENERAL INTERNAL MEDICINE
Volume 15, Issue 1, Pages 16-23

Publisher

BLACKWELL SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.2000.11198.x

Keywords

motivation; smoking cessation; inpatients; predictive validity

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVE: To compare the predictive validity of several measures of motivation to quit smoking among inpatients enrolled in a smoking cessation program. METHODS: Data collected during face-to-face counseling sessions included a standard measure of motivation to quit (stage of readiness [Stage]: precontemplation, contemplation, or preparation) and four items with responses grouped in three categories: How much do you want to quit smoking (Want), How likely is it that you will stay off cigarettes after you leave the hospital (Likely), Rate your confidence on a scale from 0 to 100 about successfully quitting In the next month (Confidence), and a counselor assessment in response to the question, How motivated is this patient to quit? (Motivation). patients were classified as nonsmokers if they reported not smoking at both the B-month and 12 month interviews, All patients lost to follow-up were considered smokers, MAIN RESULTS:At 1 year, the smoking cessation rare: was 22.5%. Each measure of motivation to quit was independently associated with cessation (p < .001) when added individually to an adjusted model. Likely was most: closely associated with cessation and Stage was least. Likely had a sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and likelihood ratio of 70.2%, 68.1%. 39.3%, 88.6%, and 2.2, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The motivation of inpatient smokers to quilt may be as easily and as accurately predicted with a single question as with the series of questions that are typically used.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available