Journal & Issues

Volume 32 (2023): Issue 1 (March 2023)

Volume 31 (2022): Issue 3 (November 2022)

Volume 31 (2022): Issue 2 (July 2022)

Volume 31 (2022): Issue 1 (March 2022)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 4 (November 2021)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 3 (July 2021)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 2 (May 2021)

Volume 30 (2021): Issue 1 (March 2021)

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 3 (December 2020)

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 2 (August 2020)

Volume 29 (2020): Issue 1 (April 2020)

Volume 28 (2019): Issue 7 (December 2019)

Volume 28 (2019): Issue 6 (August 2019)

Volume 28 (2019): Issue 5 (May 2019)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 4 (December 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 3 (October 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 2 (August 2018)

Volume 28 (2018): Issue 1 (April 2018)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 8 (December 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 7 (September 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 6 (April 2017)

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 5 (January 2017)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 4 (October 2016)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 3 (July 2016)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 2 (April 2016)

Volume 27 (2016): Issue 1 (January 2016)

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 7 (September 2015)

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 6 (June 2015)

Volume 26 (2015): Issue 5 (March 2015)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 4 (December 2014)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 3 (September 2014)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 2 (July 2014)

Volume 26 (2014): Issue 1 (April 2014)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 8 (December 2013)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 7 (September 2013)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 6 (June 2013)

Volume 25 (2013): Issue 5 (March 2013)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 4 (December 2012)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 3 (August 2012)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 2 (June 2012)

Volume 25 (2012): Issue 1 (February 2012)

Volume 24 (2011): Issue 6 (November 2011)

Volume 24 (2011): Issue 5 (May 2011)

Volume 24 (2011): Issue 4 (January 2011)

Volume 24 (2010): Issue 3 (November 2010)

Volume 24 (2010): Issue 2 (July 2010)

Volume 24 (2010): Issue 1 (April 2010)

Volume 23 (2009): Issue 6 (December 2009)

Volume 23 (2009): Issue 5 (September 2009)

Volume 23 (2009): Issue 4 (May 2009)

Volume 23 (2008): Issue 3 (December 2008)

Volume 23 (2008): Issue 2 (August 2008)

Volume 23 (2008): Issue 1 (April 2008)

Volume 22 (2007): Issue 5 (June 2007)

Volume 22 (2007): Issue 4 (January 2007)

Volume 22 (2006): Issue 3 (October 2006)

Volume 22 (2006): Issue 2 (July 2006)

Volume 22 (2006): Issue 1 (April 2006)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 8 (December 2005)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 7 (October 2005)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 6 (July 2005)

Volume 21 (2005): Issue 5 (April 2005)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 4 (December 2004)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 3 (October 2004)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 2 (July 2004)

Volume 21 (2004): Issue 1 (March 2004)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 8 (December 2003)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 7 (November 2003)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 6 (July 2003)

Volume 20 (2003): Issue 5 (March 2003)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 4 (December 2002)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 3 (August 2002)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 2 (June 2002)

Volume 20 (2002): Issue 1 (February 2002)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 7 (October 2001)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 6 (July 2001)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 5 (April 2001)

Volume 19 (2001): Issue 4 (January 2001)

Volume 19 (2000): Issue 3 (October 2000)

Volume 19 (2000): Issue 2 (July 2000)

Volume 19 (2000): Issue 1 (April 2000)

Volume 18 (1999): Issue 6 (December 1999)

Volume 18 (1999): Issue 5 (July 1999)

Volume 18 (1999): Issue 4 (April 1999)

Volume 18 (1998): Issue 3 (December 1998)

Volume 18 (1998): Issue 2 (August 1998)

Volume 18 (1998): Issue 1 (April 1998)

Volume 17 (1997): Issue 3 (December 1997)

Volume 17 (1997): Issue 2 (September 1997)

Volume 17 (1996): Issue 1 (December 1996)

Volume 16 (1995): Issue 4 (November 1995)

Volume 16 (1995): Issue 3 (July 1995)

Volume 16 (1994): Issue 2 (June 1994)

Volume 16 (1994): Issue 1 (May 1994)

Volume 15 (1992): Issue 3 (November 1992)

Volume 15 (1992): Issue 2 (April 1992)

Volume 15 (1991): Issue 1 (August 1991)

Volume 14 (1990): Issue 6 (June 1990)

Volume 14 (1989): Issue 5 (October 1989)

Volume 14 (1989): Issue 4 (February 1989)

Volume 14 (1989): Issue 3 (January 1989)

Volume 14 (1988): Issue 2 (October 1988)

Volume 14 (1987): Issue 1 (December 1987)

Volume 13 (1986): Issue 5 (December 1986)

Volume 13 (1986): Issue 4 (August 1986)

Volume 13 (1986): Issue 3 (July 1986)

Volume 13 (1985): Issue 2 (December 1985)

Volume 13 (1985): Issue 1 (January 1985)

Volume 12 (1984): Issue 5 (November 1984)

Volume 12 (1984): Issue 4 (July 1984)

Volume 12 (1984): Issue 3 (February 1984)

Volume 12 (1983): Issue 2 (June 1983)

Volume 12 (1983): Issue 1 (February 1983)

Volume 11 (1982): Issue 5 (November 1982)

Volume 11 (1982): Issue 4 (August 1982)

Volume 11 (1982): Issue 3 (January 1982)

Volume 11 (1981): Issue 2 (September 1981)

Volume 11 (1981): Issue 1 (March 1981)

Volume 10 (1980): Issue 3 (October 1980)

Volume 10 (1980): Issue 2 (July 1980)

Volume 10 (1979): Issue 1 (December 1979)

Volume 9 (1978): Issue 5 (December 1978)

Volume 9 (1978): Issue 4 (July 1978)

Volume 9 (1977): Issue 3 (October 1977)

Volume 9 (1977): Issue 2 (June 1977)

Volume 9 (1977): Issue 1 (April 1977)

Volume 8 (1976): Issue 7 (October 1976)

Volume 8 (1976): Issue 6 (June 1976)

Volume 8 (1976): Issue 5 (March 1976)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 4 (December 1975)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 3 (August 1975)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 2 (May 1975)

Volume 8 (1975): Issue 1 (January 1975)

Volume 7 (1974): Issue 5 (September 1974)

Volume 7 (1974): Issue 4 (April 1974)

Volume 7 (1973): Issue 3 (November 1973)

Volume 7 (1973): Issue 2 (June 1973)

Volume 7 (1973): Issue 1 (January 1973)

Volume 6 (1972): Issue 5 (October 1972)

Volume 6 (1972): Issue 4 (August 1972)

Volume 6 (1972): Issue 3 (March 1972)

Volume 6 (1971): Issue 2 (September 1971)

Volume 6 (1971): Issue 1 (July 1971)

Volume 5 (1970): Issue 6 (December 1970)

Volume 5 (1970): Issue 5 (November 1970)

Volume 5 (1970): Issue 4 (August 1970)

Volume 5 (1969): Issue 3 (December 1969)

Volume 5 (1969): Issue 2 (August 1969)

Volume 5 (1969): Issue 1 (June 1969)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 7 (December 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 6 (November 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 5 (July 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 4 (May 1968)

Volume 4 (1968): Issue 3 (February 1968)

Volume 4 (1967): Issue 2 (October 1967)

Volume 4 (1967): Issue 1 (August 1967)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 9 (December 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 8 (December 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 7 (November 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 6 (September 1966)

Volume 3 (1966): Issue 5 (May 1966)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 4 (October 1965)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 3 (August 1965)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 2 (May 1965)

Volume 3 (1965): Issue 1 (April 1965)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 7 (November 1964)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 6 (October 1964)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 5 (May 1964)

Volume 2 (1964): Issue 4 (February 1964)

Volume 2 (1963): Issue 3 (October 1963)

Volume 2 (1963): Issue 2 (June 1963)

Volume 2 (1963): Issue 1 (March 1963)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 10 (December 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 9 (December 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 8 (November 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 7 (November 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 6 (July 1962)

Volume 1 (1962): Issue 5 (February 1962)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 4 (November 1961)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 3 (August 1961)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 2 (May 1961)

Volume 1 (1961): Issue 1 (January 1961)

Journal Details
Format
Journal
eISSN
2719-9509
First Published
01 Jan 1992
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English

Search

Volume 27 (2017): Issue 8 (December 2017)

Journal Details
Format
Journal
eISSN
2719-9509
First Published
01 Jan 1992
Publication timeframe
4 times per year
Languages
English

Search

6 Articles
Open Access

Editors’ Note

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 183 - 183

Abstract

Open Access

Dr Thomas A. Perfetti, Recipient of the 2017 Tobacco Science Research Conference Lifetime Achievement Award

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 184 - 185

Abstract

Open Access

Determination of Mercury in Aerosol by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 186 - 194

Abstract

Summary

Based on the knowledge gained from published studies, a new analytical method has been developed for the quantification of mercury (Hg) in the gas-vapor phase of mainstream cigarette smoke and in heated tobacco aerosol generated by a tobacco heating system (THS) using Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS). From a preliminary test, the mercury concentration in the particulate matter of mainstream smoke from Kentucky reference cigarettes 3R4F generated under the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) smoking regimen was compared with the mercury concentration in the gasvapor phase to assure that mercury is only measurable in the gas-vapor phase, as reported in an earlier published study. The particulate matter was collected using an electrostatic precipitation trap and was analyzed by ICP-MS after a mineralization step. The gas-vapor phase was trapped in the same smoking run as for the particulate matter using two impingers containing a nitric acid-hydrochloric acid-gold solution. The impingers were connected in series behind the electrostatic precipitation trap and the combined impinger solution was analyzed by ICP-MS after sample dilution without further sample treatment. The addition of gold has shown to be efficient for maintaining mercury in an ionized form in the impinger solution and to minimize the mercury memory effect in the sample introduction system of the ICP-MS. Only mercury in the gas-vapor phase could be quantified whereas the signal for mercury in the particulate matter was found close to those of blank solutions and was not measurable, as already mentioned in an earlier study. Following this preliminary test, the electrostatic precipitation trap was replaced by a Cambridge filter pad for the separation of the gas-vapor phase from the particulate matter where only mercury in the gas-vapor phase was quantified.

The method for the quantification of mercury in the gas-vapor phase of aerosols obtained under Health Canada (HC) and ISO smoking regimens was validated according to International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) and Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) guidelines. Accuracy profiles were evaluated as described in Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR). The regression curve was shown to be linear within the evaluated concentration range from 25 pg/mL to 1000 pg/mL with a weighting factor 1/x. The coefficients of variation for repeatability (r) were 3.6% for 3R4F and 4.8% for THS under HC smoking regimen and 3.6% for 3R4F and 4.6% for THS under ISO smoking regimen. The coefficients of variation for intermediate precision (IP) were 7.7% for 3R4F and 7.7% for THS under HC smoking regimen and 4.7% for 3R4F and 4.6% for THS under ISO smoking regimen. The nominal mercury concentrations for 3R4F obtained during the validation under both HC and ISO smoking regimens were found to be in line with results reported in a previously published CORESTA study.

Open Access

Analysis of the Polyphenols of Tobacco Using Pressurized Liquid Extraction (PLE) and Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography With Electrospray Ionization – Tandem Mass Spectometric Detection (UPLC-ESI-MS/MS)

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 195 - 207

Abstract

Summary

Polyphenols are chemicals found in tobacco that are affected by the method used to cure the leaf and, as a result, can be useful in the characterization of tobacco products. The purpose of this work was to develop an analytical method to investigate the levels of six polyphenols found in tobacco leaves and tobacco products: 3-O-caffeoylquinic acid (chlorogenic acid), 4-O-caffeoylquinic acid (cryptochlorogenic acid), 5-O-caffeoylquinic acid (neochlorogenic acid), kaempferol 3-O-rutinoside (nicotiflorin), quercetin 3-O-rutinoside (rutin), and 6-methoxy-7-hydroxycoumarin (scopoletin). Extraction conditions for sample preparation using PLE and instrument conditions for analysis by UPLC-MS/MS were optimized and validated. Results from the analysis of 30 cured tobacco leaves are presented and discussed in the context of each curing method represented. Results from the analysis of various tobacco products are also presented and trends observed across product types are discussed in the context of the applicability of the validated method. Total polyphenol levels for flue-cured, Oriental, and air-cured leaves were determined to be in the ranges of 18–41 mg/g, 5–27 mg/g, and 0.5–3 mg/g respectively. Similarly, cigarette polyphenol levels were found in the range of 4–16 mg/g and cigar polyphenol levels were less than 1.5 mg/g. The trends observed in the results for the tobacco leaf samples are consistent with expectations regarding the fate of polyphenols under the conditions commonly used in curing procedures. The results for the tobacco products demonstrate that the validated method can be used to study polyphenol content in cigarettes and a variety of cigar types including pipe tobacco cigars.

Open Access

Selected Constituent Yield Variation in the Smoke of Commercial Cigarette Brands on the Japanese Market

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 208 - 223

Abstract

Summary

This study focused on the variation in the yields of constituents in smoke from commercial cigarette brands available on the Japanese market. Nineteen commercial cigarette brands were sampled five times every two months from 2009 to 2010. The target constituents were benzo[a]-pyrene, 1,3-butadiene, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, N-nitrosonornicotine (NNN), 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK), carbon monoxide, “tar”, and nicotine. The results of this study showed that the coefficient of variation (CV) values varied greatly by brands, constituents, and smoking regimes. The yields of NNN and NNK in the smoke were strongly correlated to their yields in the tobacco filler blend for most brands. The yields of benzo[a]pyrene under the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the Health Canada Intense (HCI) smoking regimes and 1,3-butadiene under the HCI smoking regime were found to be influenced by the measurement. It was shown that factors for variation were highly varied among constituents. The grand mean of CV values for NNN and formaldehyde associated with cigarette manufacturing over ten months and measurement at the JT laboratory under the HCI smoking regimes were 17.1% and 6.6% respectively. The grand mean of CV values for NNN and formaldehyde associated with both cigarette manufacturing over ten months and measurement at different laboratories under the HCI smoking regimes were 23.7% and 22.9% respectively. This is due to the fact that formaldehyde showed the highest CV values for reproducibility among the constituents. Thus, in order to set realistic and robust confidence intervals, it is very important to take into account the variations associated with cigarette manufacturing and measurement within and between laboratories.

Open Access

Accuracy of the Smoking Questionnaire

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 224 - 239

Abstract

Summary

The smoking questionnaire (SQ), a multidimensional questionnaire covering the major dimensions of cigarette smoking, was developed to address the heterogeneity in the assessment of smoking exposure. It consists of eight questions and can be completed within a few minutes. Test-retest reliability of the SQ and concurrent validity with the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2011 questionnaire were examined in a clinical study conducted in adult US current menthol cigarette smokers. The SQ and the BRFSS were self-administrated twice before and after randomization with a 6-day interval. The inter-temporal analyses included current smokers aged 22 to 66 years who completed the SQ at both timepoints. The percent agreement of items and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the comparisons between the two timepoints and between the SQ and the BRFSS questionnaire. To evaluate the feasibility of the SQ and to capture subjects’ opinions about the SQ, a meta-questionnaire was administrated. High test-retest reliability levels (percent agreement of > 70 to 100% between the two timepoints) were found for SQ smoking behavior items, in particular for items related to current smoking status, 100-cigarettes lifetime, regular smoking, age of initiation and preferred brand. Moderate (55% agreement) to high test-retest reliability (84% agreement) was found for daily consumption of manufactured cigarettes. The comparison between the SQ and the BRFSS 2011 showed a high concurrent validity (98 to 100% agreement). The SQ was completed on average in 3 to 4 min and was assessed as easy to use. The findings demonstrate that the SQ is reliable in smokers and a practical tool to assess smoking exposure in clinical studies.

6 Articles
Open Access

Editors’ Note

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 183 - 183

Abstract

Open Access

Dr Thomas A. Perfetti, Recipient of the 2017 Tobacco Science Research Conference Lifetime Achievement Award

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 184 - 185

Abstract

Open Access

Determination of Mercury in Aerosol by Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 186 - 194

Abstract

Summary

Based on the knowledge gained from published studies, a new analytical method has been developed for the quantification of mercury (Hg) in the gas-vapor phase of mainstream cigarette smoke and in heated tobacco aerosol generated by a tobacco heating system (THS) using Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry (ICP-MS). From a preliminary test, the mercury concentration in the particulate matter of mainstream smoke from Kentucky reference cigarettes 3R4F generated under the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) smoking regimen was compared with the mercury concentration in the gasvapor phase to assure that mercury is only measurable in the gas-vapor phase, as reported in an earlier published study. The particulate matter was collected using an electrostatic precipitation trap and was analyzed by ICP-MS after a mineralization step. The gas-vapor phase was trapped in the same smoking run as for the particulate matter using two impingers containing a nitric acid-hydrochloric acid-gold solution. The impingers were connected in series behind the electrostatic precipitation trap and the combined impinger solution was analyzed by ICP-MS after sample dilution without further sample treatment. The addition of gold has shown to be efficient for maintaining mercury in an ionized form in the impinger solution and to minimize the mercury memory effect in the sample introduction system of the ICP-MS. Only mercury in the gas-vapor phase could be quantified whereas the signal for mercury in the particulate matter was found close to those of blank solutions and was not measurable, as already mentioned in an earlier study. Following this preliminary test, the electrostatic precipitation trap was replaced by a Cambridge filter pad for the separation of the gas-vapor phase from the particulate matter where only mercury in the gas-vapor phase was quantified.

The method for the quantification of mercury in the gas-vapor phase of aerosols obtained under Health Canada (HC) and ISO smoking regimens was validated according to International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH) and Association of Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) guidelines. Accuracy profiles were evaluated as described in Association Française de Normalisation (AFNOR). The regression curve was shown to be linear within the evaluated concentration range from 25 pg/mL to 1000 pg/mL with a weighting factor 1/x. The coefficients of variation for repeatability (r) were 3.6% for 3R4F and 4.8% for THS under HC smoking regimen and 3.6% for 3R4F and 4.6% for THS under ISO smoking regimen. The coefficients of variation for intermediate precision (IP) were 7.7% for 3R4F and 7.7% for THS under HC smoking regimen and 4.7% for 3R4F and 4.6% for THS under ISO smoking regimen. The nominal mercury concentrations for 3R4F obtained during the validation under both HC and ISO smoking regimens were found to be in line with results reported in a previously published CORESTA study.

Open Access

Analysis of the Polyphenols of Tobacco Using Pressurized Liquid Extraction (PLE) and Ultra Performance Liquid Chromatography With Electrospray Ionization – Tandem Mass Spectometric Detection (UPLC-ESI-MS/MS)

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 195 - 207

Abstract

Summary

Polyphenols are chemicals found in tobacco that are affected by the method used to cure the leaf and, as a result, can be useful in the characterization of tobacco products. The purpose of this work was to develop an analytical method to investigate the levels of six polyphenols found in tobacco leaves and tobacco products: 3-O-caffeoylquinic acid (chlorogenic acid), 4-O-caffeoylquinic acid (cryptochlorogenic acid), 5-O-caffeoylquinic acid (neochlorogenic acid), kaempferol 3-O-rutinoside (nicotiflorin), quercetin 3-O-rutinoside (rutin), and 6-methoxy-7-hydroxycoumarin (scopoletin). Extraction conditions for sample preparation using PLE and instrument conditions for analysis by UPLC-MS/MS were optimized and validated. Results from the analysis of 30 cured tobacco leaves are presented and discussed in the context of each curing method represented. Results from the analysis of various tobacco products are also presented and trends observed across product types are discussed in the context of the applicability of the validated method. Total polyphenol levels for flue-cured, Oriental, and air-cured leaves were determined to be in the ranges of 18–41 mg/g, 5–27 mg/g, and 0.5–3 mg/g respectively. Similarly, cigarette polyphenol levels were found in the range of 4–16 mg/g and cigar polyphenol levels were less than 1.5 mg/g. The trends observed in the results for the tobacco leaf samples are consistent with expectations regarding the fate of polyphenols under the conditions commonly used in curing procedures. The results for the tobacco products demonstrate that the validated method can be used to study polyphenol content in cigarettes and a variety of cigar types including pipe tobacco cigars.

Open Access

Selected Constituent Yield Variation in the Smoke of Commercial Cigarette Brands on the Japanese Market

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 208 - 223

Abstract

Summary

This study focused on the variation in the yields of constituents in smoke from commercial cigarette brands available on the Japanese market. Nineteen commercial cigarette brands were sampled five times every two months from 2009 to 2010. The target constituents were benzo[a]-pyrene, 1,3-butadiene, benzene, formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, acrolein, N-nitrosonornicotine (NNN), 4-(methylnitrosamino)-1-(3-pyridyl)-1-butanone (NNK), carbon monoxide, “tar”, and nicotine. The results of this study showed that the coefficient of variation (CV) values varied greatly by brands, constituents, and smoking regimes. The yields of NNN and NNK in the smoke were strongly correlated to their yields in the tobacco filler blend for most brands. The yields of benzo[a]pyrene under the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the Health Canada Intense (HCI) smoking regimes and 1,3-butadiene under the HCI smoking regime were found to be influenced by the measurement. It was shown that factors for variation were highly varied among constituents. The grand mean of CV values for NNN and formaldehyde associated with cigarette manufacturing over ten months and measurement at the JT laboratory under the HCI smoking regimes were 17.1% and 6.6% respectively. The grand mean of CV values for NNN and formaldehyde associated with both cigarette manufacturing over ten months and measurement at different laboratories under the HCI smoking regimes were 23.7% and 22.9% respectively. This is due to the fact that formaldehyde showed the highest CV values for reproducibility among the constituents. Thus, in order to set realistic and robust confidence intervals, it is very important to take into account the variations associated with cigarette manufacturing and measurement within and between laboratories.

Open Access

Accuracy of the Smoking Questionnaire

Published Online: 29 Dec 2017
Page range: 224 - 239

Abstract

Summary

The smoking questionnaire (SQ), a multidimensional questionnaire covering the major dimensions of cigarette smoking, was developed to address the heterogeneity in the assessment of smoking exposure. It consists of eight questions and can be completed within a few minutes. Test-retest reliability of the SQ and concurrent validity with the Behavior Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) 2011 questionnaire were examined in a clinical study conducted in adult US current menthol cigarette smokers. The SQ and the BRFSS were self-administrated twice before and after randomization with a 6-day interval. The inter-temporal analyses included current smokers aged 22 to 66 years who completed the SQ at both timepoints. The percent agreement of items and 95% confidence intervals were calculated for the comparisons between the two timepoints and between the SQ and the BRFSS questionnaire. To evaluate the feasibility of the SQ and to capture subjects’ opinions about the SQ, a meta-questionnaire was administrated. High test-retest reliability levels (percent agreement of > 70 to 100% between the two timepoints) were found for SQ smoking behavior items, in particular for items related to current smoking status, 100-cigarettes lifetime, regular smoking, age of initiation and preferred brand. Moderate (55% agreement) to high test-retest reliability (84% agreement) was found for daily consumption of manufactured cigarettes. The comparison between the SQ and the BRFSS 2011 showed a high concurrent validity (98 to 100% agreement). The SQ was completed on average in 3 to 4 min and was assessed as easy to use. The findings demonstrate that the SQ is reliable in smokers and a practical tool to assess smoking exposure in clinical studies.