TY - JOUR
T1 - Psychometric Evaluation of the E-cigarette Dependence Scale
AU - Morean, Meghan E.
AU - Krishnan-Sarin, Suchitra
AU - Sussman, Steve
AU - Foulds, Jonathan
AU - Fishbein, Howard
AU - Grana, Rachel
AU - O'Malley, Stephanie S.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Author(s).
PY - 2019/11/1
Y1 - 2019/11/1
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074304931&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074304931&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/ntr/ntx271
DO - 10.1093/ntr/ntx271
M3 - Article
C2 - 29301008
AN - SCOPUS:85074304931
SN - 1462-2203
VL - 21
SP - 1556
EP - 1564
JO - Nicotine and Tobacco Research
JF - Nicotine and Tobacco Research
IS - 11
ER -