The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Smoking topography: Reliability and validity in dependent smokers
Abstract
Data from two studies were analyzed to determine whether smoking through the mouthpiece of a topography unit yields consistent measures over time and to verify that smoking through a mouthpiece results in a similar degree of smoke exposure as conventional smoking. In both studies, subjects smoked their usual brand of cigarette ad libitum. In study A, subjects (n=7) smoked through a mouthpiece on 4 separate experimental days. In study B, subjects (n=10) smoked on 2 separate days: Once conventionally and once through a mouthpiece. In both studies, exhaled carbon monoxide (CO) and physiological effects (heart rate and blood pressure) were measured before and after smoking. In study B, plasma nicotine concentrations also were measured. In study A, puff volume, puff duration, interpuff interval, and maximum puff velocity averaged 30.8 ml,.9 s, 19.9 s, and 44.6 ml/s, respectively. Intraclass correlation coefficients computed for puff volume (0.66), puff duration (0.75), and maximum puff velocity (0.68) indicated that these measures showed good reliability. In study B, smoking through the mouthpiece yielded similar topographical (time to smoke and number of puffs per cigarette) measures as conventional smoking. Also similar were changes in biochemical values: Plasma nicotine (18.5 ng/ml vs. 25.5 ng/ml), exhaled CO (4.6 ppm vs. 5.1 ppm), and heart rate (8.6 beats/min vs. 7.4 beats/min) for conventional and topography mouthpiece smoking conditions, respectively. Topography measures did not differ significantly between the two studies. Overall, the data from these two small-sample studies suggest that smoking topography provides a valid and reliable index of conventional smoking and an indirect measure of smoke exposure.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“In addition, smoking topography (i.e. the frequency and duration of puffs) is also a reliable and valid index of changes in smoking behaviour (Lee et al. 2003).”
From Mindfulness, Acceptance and Defusion Strategies in Smokers: A Systematic Review of Laboratory Studies (2018) · cites this paper as Lee et al. 2003
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Benam, K. H., Novak, R., Nawroth, J., Hirano-Kobayashi, M., Ferrante, T. C., Choe, Y., Prantil-Baun, R., Weaver, J. C., Bahinski, A., Parker, K. K., et al. (2016) · Cell Systems · doi:10.1016/j.cels.2016.10.003 · Cited by 309
Puffing Topography and Nicotine Intake of Electronic Cigarette Users
Behar, R. Z., Hua, M., & Talbot, P. (2015) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0117222 · Cited by 203
“A second study showed that the reliability of topography devices, such as the CReSS, is not affected by the attachment of a mouthpiece adapter [28], which is in agreement with our study.”
ResultDelay discounting predicts cigarette smoking in a laboratory model of abstinence reinforcement
Dallery, J., & Raiff, B. R. (2007) · Psychopharmacology · doi:10.1007/s00213-006-0627-5 · Cited by 197
“The 30-s interval was chosen because it approximates the average inter-puff interval found in a previous study on smoking topography (Lee et al. 2003).”
The effects of hookah/waterpipe smoking on general health and the cardiovascular system
Qasim, H., Alarabi, A. B., Alzoubi, K. H., Karim, Z. A., Alshbool, F. Z., & Khasawneh, F. T. (2019) · Environmental Health and Preventive Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12199-019-0811-y · Cited by 174
“Both cigarette- and hookah-smoking topography serves as an indirect measure of smoke and chemical exposure [12, 14].”
BackgroundCigarette smoking topography in smokers with schizophrenia and matched non-psychiatric controls
Tidey, J. W., Rohsenow, D. J., Kaplan, G. B., & Swift, R. M. (2005) · Drug and Alcohol Dependence · doi:10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2005.04.002 · Cited by 128
“Although Lee et al. (2003) reported results, from a small sample of non-psychiatric smokers, which indicated that the CReSS did not alter the manner in which cigarettes were smoked, it remains to be determined whether the topography measures reported in the current study are valid measures of normal smoking behavior i…”
Result
Metadata
- Authors
- Pickworth, W., Lee, E., Malson, J., Moolchan, E., & Waters, A.
- Affiliations
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (US)
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Corresponding author
- Pickworth, Wallace
- Venue
- Nicotine & Tobacco Research
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-10-01
- Volume
- 5
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 673-679
- ISSN
- 1462-2203 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-994X
- OpenAlex
- W2034220105
- Cited by
- 135
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 2.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Nicotine & Tobacco Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Cancer Institute (P50CA084718, P50-CA84718)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) Research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Keywords
- smoking topography, cigarette smoking, puff volume, puff duration, exhaled carbon monoxide, plasma nicotine, heart rate, blood pressure, smoke exposure, reliability statistics, validity
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Blood Pressure, Carbon Monoxide, Equipment Design, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Models, Theoretical, Sensitivity and Specificity, Smoking, Tobacco Use Disorder, Reproducibility of Results
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