Control of Cigarette Smoking from a Medical Perspective

Kuller, Lewis H.; Meilahn, Elaine N.; Townsend, Mary C.; Weinberg, Gene B.

doi:10.1146/annurev.pu.03.050182.001101

Cited by 30 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Fortunately, smoking cessation is associated with decreased risks for lung cancer, heart attack, and cardiovascular disease, and reduction in risk occurs fairly soon after quitting. 3 Formal smoking cessation programs are labor intensive, time-consuming, expensive, limited in the number they can reach, attract only a motivated, self-selected group of smokers, and evidence high recidivism during follow-up.7"9 By contrast, minimal-contact interventions utilize either brief therapist consultations, comprehensive self-help booklets or manuals, written pamphlets and taped messages, or a combination of these strategies. Compared with formal programs, minimal-contact interventions are relatively simple to administer, inexpensive, able to reach greater numbers, and more appealing to smokers who prefer not to engage in more structured cessation programs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a minimal-contact smoking cessation intervention in an outpatient setting.

Janz¹,

Becker²,

Kirscht³

et al. 1987

Am J Public Health

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined the ability of a provider-initiated, minimal-contact intervention to modify the smoking behavior of ambulatory clinic patients. Smokers at two outpatient sites were assigned to one of three groups: provider intervention only (PI); provider intervention plus self-help manual (PI/M); and usual care (control) group (C).The physician message emphasized the patient's personal susceptibility, the physician's concern, and the patient's ability to quit (self-efficacy). The nurse consultation concentrated on benefits and barriers associated with stopping, and on strategies for cessation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of a minimal-contact smoking cessation intervention in an outpatient setting.

Janz¹,

Becker²,

Kirscht³

et al. 1987

Am J Public Health

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Definmion and Boundariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two key criteria are whether or not exposure to the risk factor and the development of the disease or disorder make biological sense, and whether or not greater exposure to the presumed risk factor increases the probability of the occurrence of the disease or disorder (called the dose-response relationship). Smoking and the occurrence of lung cancer is an association that makes biological sense and exhibits a dose-response relationship (Kuller et al, 1982).…”

Section: Definmion and Boundariesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Specificity increases arguments for causality, but lack of specificity does not rule out a factor as a causal agent. For example, smoking is related to many diseases and is specifically related to lung cancer (Kuller, Meilahn, Townsend, & Weinberg, 1982).The temporal relationship ofassociation refers to whether or not exposure to a risk factor precedes the disease or disorder. Prospective studies can verify temporal relationships and add to the credibility of a presumed risk factor.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Extending the Concept of Social Validity: Behavior Analysis for Disease Prevention and Health Promotion

Winett

Moore

Anderson

1991

J of App Behav Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A broader definition of social validity is proposed wherein a socially valid behavior-change intervention is directed to a problem of verifiable importance, the intervention is valued and used appropriately by designated target groups, and the intervention as used has sufficient behavioral impact to substantially reduce the probability of the problem's occurrence in target populations. The verifiable importance of a problem is based on epidemiological data, and the value and appropriate use of an intervention are enhanced through the use of conceptual frameworks for social marketing and behavior change and considerable formative and pilot research. Behavioral impact is assessed through efficacy and effectiveness studies. Thus, the social validity of a behavior-change intervention is established through a number of interactive, a priori steps. This approach to defining social validity is related to critical analysis and intervention issues including individual and population perspectives and "top-down" and "bottom-up" approaches to intervention design. This broader definition of social validity is illustrated by a project to reduce the risk of HIV infection among adolescents. Although the various steps involved in creating socially valid interventions can be complicated, time-consuming, and ratings are the ones more likely to be purposely disseminated and adopted. Interventions with dear evidence ofbehavioral outcome, but with low social validity, may be purposely disseminated but will have a lower probability of being adopted (Stolz, 1981). The last point indicates that social validity is directly related to such broader areas as the dissemination of innovations (Rogers, 1983) and appropriate community technologies (Fawcett, Seekins, Whang, & Muiu, 1984).The early exposition of social validity (Wolf, 1978) was apparently presented as a resolution of the conffict between objective behavioral measures of outcome and more subjective post hoc measures of value, importance, and utility by consumers. It was decided that post hoc subjective consumer measures can be an admissible part of behavior-analytic work because these measures are necessary to refine and validate interventions. This discussion offers a broader perspective of social validity. From our perspective, social validity should be a process using epidemiological data and a series of interactive a priori steps, induding frequent contact with potential users of an intervention and the application of both objective and subjective measures. Thus, we 215 19911 249, [215][216][217][218][219][220][221][222][223][224][225][226][227][228][229][230] NumBER 2 (summER 1991) RICHARD A. WINETT et al. have prepared this discussion artide to (a) broaden the boundaries of social validity, (b) articulate measures and processes involved in assessing social validity, and (c) provide examples of the interactive steps involved in designing, refining, and evaluating a socially valid intervention program. DEFINMION AND BouNDARIEsA socially valid behavior-change intervention ...

show abstract

“…Lives can be saved. With all the qualifications, caveats, and complexi ties, it is still true that much of the damage from smoking is revers able within about five years , so getting smokers to quit yields dividends quickly (38). As a longer term strategy , children can be protected from having to struggle to quit.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Legal Approaches to Smoking Deterrence

Walsh¹

1986

Annual Review of Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Control of Cigarette Smoking from a Medical Perspective

Cited by 30 publications

References 35 publications

Evaluation of a minimal-contact smoking cessation intervention in an outpatient setting.

Evaluation of a minimal-contact smoking cessation intervention in an outpatient setting.

Extending the Concept of Social Validity: Behavior Analysis for Disease Prevention and Health Promotion

Legal Approaches to Smoking Deterrence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About