Dataset Information

Impact of differing definitions of dual tobacco use: implications for studying dual use and a call for operational definitions.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Concomitant use of two forms of tobacco is an increasing public health concern, yet there is little consensus regarding a consistent definition of so-called "dual use." We defined dual use as cigarette and smokeless tobacco (ST) consumption with either product used daily or nondaily.

Methods

We analyzed a cohort of 36,013 Air Force recruits. We categorized dual tobacco use across 2 dimensions, type of tobacco products (cigarettes, ST, or others), and the frequency of use (daily vs. nondaily). We determined how varying the definition impacted the prevalence estimates and evaluated the prevalence estimate based on our recommended definition of dual use. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to evaluate the risk profile of dual users of ST and cigarettes versus mono users of ST and mono users of cigarettes.

Results

Varying definitions of dual use vary prevalence estimates 50-fold (0.5%-25.3%). Including only ST and cigarettes narrows the prevalence estimate to less than 4-fold (2.0%-9.7%). Dual users are more likely to be young Caucasian males, with lower education, and from families with relatively higher incomes. Compared with mono users, dual users of cigarettes and ST have a distinct pattern of risk profiles.

Conclusions

Depending on the definition of dual use, markedly different prevalence and risk profiles are observed. Dual users of ST and cigarettes are a unique group of tobacco users. We propose a common definition of dual use to advance our understanding of this unique group.

SUBMITTER: Klesges RC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3129236 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Impact of differing definitions of dual tobacco use: implications for studying dual use and a call for operational definitions.

Klesges Robert C RC Ebbert Jon O JO Morgan Glen D GD Sherrill-Mittleman Deborah D Asfar Taghrid T Talcott Wayne G WG Debon Margaret M

Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco 20110324 7

<h4>Introduction</h4>Concomitant use of two forms of tobacco is an increasing public health concern, yet there is little consensus regarding a consistent definition of so-called "dual use." We defined dual use as cigarette and smokeless tobacco (ST) consumption with either product used daily or nondaily.<h4>Methods</h4>We analyzed a cohort of 36,013 Air Force recruits. We categorized dual tobacco use across 2 dimensions, type of tobacco products (cigarettes, ST, or others), and the frequency of ...[more]

PMID: 21436298

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCommon, operational definitions are crucial to assess interventions and outcomes related to pediatric mechanical ventilation. These definitions can reduce unnecessary variability among research and quality improvement efforts, to ensure findings are generalizable, and can be pooled to establish best practices.Research questionCan we establish operational definitions for key elements related to pediatric ventilator liberation using a combination of detailed literature review and consensus-based approaches?Study design and methodsA panel of 26 international experts in pediatric ventilator liberation, two methodologists, and two librarians conducted systematic reviews on eight topic areas related to pediatric ventilator liberation. Through a series of virtual meetings, we established draft definitions that were voted upon using an anonymous web-based process. Definitions were revised by incorporating extracted data gathered during the systematic review and discussed in another consensus meeting. A second round of voting was conducted to confirm the final definitions.ResultsIn eight topic areas identified by the experts, 16 preliminary definitions were established. Based on initial discussion and the first round of voting, modifications were suggested for 11 of the 16 definitions. There was significant variability in how these items were defined in the literature reviewed. The final round of voting achieved ≥ 80% agreement for all 16 definitions in the following areas: what constitutes respiratory support (invasive mechanical ventilation and noninvasive respiratory support), liberation and failed attempts to liberate from invasive mechanical ventilation, liberation from respiratory support, duration of noninvasive respiratory support, total duration of invasive mechanical ventilation, spontaneous breathing trials, extubation readiness testing, 28 ventilator-free days, and planned vs rescue use of post-extubation noninvasive respiratory support.InterpretationWe propose that these consensus-based definitions for elements of pediatric ventilator liberation, informed by evidence, be used for future quality improvement initiatives and research studies to improve generalizability and facilitate comparison.

Project description:Operational research (OR) is the discipline of using models, either quantitative or qualitative, to aid decision-making in complex implementation problems. The methods of OR have been used in healthcare since the 1950s in diverse areas such as emergency medicine and the interface between acute and community care; hospital performance; scheduling and management of patient home visits; scheduling of patient appointments; and many other complex implementation problems of an operational or logistical nature.To date, there has been limited debate about the role that operational research should take within implementation science. I detail three such roles for OR all grounded in upfront system thinking: structuring implementation problems, prospective evaluation of improvement interventions, and strategic reconfiguration. Case studies from mental health, emergency medicine, and stroke care are used to illustrate each role. I then describe the challenges for applied OR within implementation science at the organisational, interventional, and disciplinary levels. Two key challenges include the difficulty faced in achieving a position of mutual understanding between implementation scientists and research users and a stark lack of evaluation of OR interventions. To address these challenges, I propose a research agenda to evaluate applied OR through the lens of implementation science, the liberation of OR from the specialist research and consultancy environment, and co-design of models with service users. Operational research is a mature discipline that has developed a significant volume of methodology to improve health services. OR offers implementation scientists the opportunity to do more upfront system thinking before committing resources or taking risks. OR has three roles within implementation science: structuring an implementation problem, prospective evaluation of implementation problems, and a tool for strategic reconfiguration of health services. Challenges facing OR as implementation science include limited evidence and evaluation of impact, limited service user involvement, a lack of managerial awareness, effective communication between research users and OR modellers, and availability of healthcare data. To progress the science, a focus is needed in three key areas: evaluation of OR interventions, embedding the knowledge of OR in health services, and educating OR modellers about the aims and benefits of service user involvement.

Dataset Information

Impact of differing definitions of dual tobacco use: implications for studying dual use and a call for operational definitions.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Impact of differing definitions of dual tobacco use: implications for studying dual use and a call for operational definitions.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets