CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 206

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 14 of the 14 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Delay discounting predicts postpartum relapse to cigarette smoking among pregnant women.

Yoon, Jin H., Higgins, Stephen T., Heil, Sarah H., Sugarbaker, Rena J., Thomas, Colleen S., Badger, Gary J.·2007·Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
DOI 10.1037/1064-1297.15.2.186
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Delay discounting (DD), a measure of impulsivity, describes the rate at which rewards lose value as the delay to their receipt increases. Greater discounting has been associated with cigarette smoking and various other types of drug abuse in recent research. The present study examined whether DD predicts treatment outcome among cigarette smokers. More specifically, the authors examined whether baseline discounting for hypothetical monetary rewards predicted smoking status at 24 weeks postpartum among women who discontinued smoking during pregnancy. Participants were 48 pregnant women (10.5 = 4.1 weeks gestational age at study entry) who participated in a clinical trial examining the use of incentives to prevent postpartum relapse. Several sociodemographic characteristics (being younger, being less educated, and reporting a history of depression) assessed at study entry were associated with increased baseline DD, but in multivariate analyses only DD predicted smoking status at 24 weeks postpartum. Greater baseline DD was a significant predictor of smoking status at 24 weeks postpartum. DD was reassessed periodically throughout the study and did not significantly change over time among those who eventually resumed smoking or those who sustained abstinence. The results extend the association of DD with risk for substance abuse to pregnant and recently postpartum cigarette smokers and demonstrate a significant relationship between DD and treatment outcome.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/1064-1297.15.2.186

Cites

14 of 14 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 14 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Yoon, J. H., Higgins, S. T., Heil, S. H., Sugarbaker, R. J., Thomas, C. S., & Badger, G. J.
Venue
Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2007
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
176-186
ISSN
  • 1936-2293
  • 1064-1297
DOI
10.1037/1064-1297.15.2.186
Cited by
206
References
14
Language
en
Funders
National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA 14028; DA 007242)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review