Search

Risk perceptions are key constructs in some theories of health behavior. A tripartite model of risk perception, the TRIRISK model, was developed to assess deliberative, affective, and experiential components of risk perception. The current paper attempts to replicate the factor structure of the TRIRISK measure for cancer and extend the structure to respiratory illness. Participants 18 or older were recruited using an address-based sample in New York State to participate in a Web-based survey. We employed the TRIRISK questionnaire with respect to cancer and respiratory illness. Confirmatory Factor Analyses were conducted in Mplus to validate the TRIRISK model in our sample. TRIRISK model fit across demographic and behavioral groups was tested using multiple-group models. Of the 704 people included in the analysis, the mean age of participants was 46.9, the majority reported being female (58.5%), and most were White (81.7%). For cancer and respiratory illness, items loaded on the respective constructs as expected. Overall, the TRIRISK model framework fits well across differing subgroups, suggesting that this is a valid model of risk perception to use in a general population sample. These results provide further evidence that the TRIRISK model is a good model to use for risk perceptions in tobacco control research. The TRIRISK model can be used to communicate risk to encourage positive health behaviors among most sociodemographic groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: We assessed whether in-depth messaging delivered via a smoking cessation quitline results in participants: (1) speaking to their physician, or (2) insurance company regarding lung cancer screening (LCS). Methods: Eligible participants lived in New York State and met the United States Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for LCS (N = 1000). A randomized trial was conducted among New York State Smokers' Quitline participants to assess the impact of a brochure containing information on risks, benefits, and costs associated with LCS (control group) versus the brochure supplemented with phone-based in-depth messaging (treatment group). Results: After a 4-month telephone survey (N = 431), associations between the study groups were examined for: (1) speaking with a physician regarding LCS, and (2) speaking with an insurance company about LCS coverage. Multivariate logistic regression models adjusted for demographics, insurance status, emphysema/COPD, and past 30-day cigarObjectives: We assessed whether in-depth messaging delivered via a smoking cessation quitline results in participants: (1) speaking to their physician, or (2) insurance company regarding lung cancer screening (LCS). Methods: Eligible participants lived in New York State and met the United States Preventive Services Task Force eligibility criteria for LCS (N = 1000). A randomized trial was conducted among New York State Smokers' Quitline participants to assess the impact of a brochure containing information on risks, benefits, and costs associated with LCS (control group) versus the brochure supplemented with phone-based in-depth messaging (treatment group). Results: After a 4-month telephone survey (N = 431), associations between the study groups were examined for: (1) speaking with a physician regarding LCS, and (2) speaking with an insurance company about LCS coverage. Multivariate logistic regression models adjusted for demographics, insurance status, emphysema/COPD, and past 30-day cigarette use found no significant associations. However, sensitivity analyses among control participants found significant associations, including for speaking with a physician (p < .05) by receipt of the study brochure. Analyses repeated in the treatment group also had statistically significant findings emerge, including for speaking with insurance company (p < .05). Conclusion: The educational brochure may be an effective and low-cost way to deliver information about LCS. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Limited data exist on what young adults report as their first-ever nicotine product; some evidence suggests that they report hookah as their first product smoked. Objectives: This study reports on the first nicotine product used among undergraduates who had ever tried tobacco, and explores correlates of hookah as that first product. Methods: Participants included a convenience sample of undergraduate students (n = 1538) at four universities in upstate New York during fall 2013. Descriptive statistics assessed first nicotine product used and prevalence of current use. Logistic regression was used to examine correlates of hookah as the first nicotine product used. Results: Among the 832 students who reported ever use of any nicotine product, 25.4% reported hookah as their first product smoked; only combustible cigarettes (39.5%) were reported more frequently. Among students who ever smoked cigarettes, most reported cigarettes as their introductory product. Among students who never smoked cigarettes, nearly half reported hookah as their introductory product. Among ever nicotine users, current hookah smoking was common (34.9%), and greater than current e-cigarette (25.9%) and current combustible cigarette (26.4%) use. Never users of cigarettes, females, and non-Hispanic African Americans, had higher adjusted odds of reporting hookah as their introductory product. Conclusions: The results of this study have implications for the identification of risk factors for tobacco initiation, the assessment of tobacco use patterns and behaviors, and the tailoring of tobacco prevention initiatives among youth. Our findings suggest that broadening prevention efforts beyond a focus on combustible cigarettes may be warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]