Developing fit-for-purpose self-report instruments for assessing consumer responses to tobacco and nicotine products: the ABOUTTM Toolbox initiative [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

Background. Determining the public health impact of tobacco harm reduction strategies requires the assessment of consumer perception and behavior associated with tobacco and nicotine products (TNPs) with different exposure and risk profiles. In this context, rigorous methods to develop and validate psychometrically sound self-report instruments to measure consumers’ responses to TNPs are needed. Methods. Consistent with best practice guidelines, including the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s “Guidance for Industry Patient-Reported Outcome Measures: Use in Medical Product Development to Support Labeling Claims,” scientifically designed, fit-for-purpose, reliable, and valid instruments are now being applied to tobacco regulatory research. Results. This brief report presents the ABOUTTM Toolbox (Assessment of Behavioral OUtcomes related to Tobacco and nicotine products) initiative. This communication: (1) describes the methodological steps followed for the development and validation of the measurement instruments included in the ABOUTTM Toolbox, (2) presents a summary of the high-priority tobacco-related domains that are currently covered in the ABOUTTM Toolbox (i.e., risk perception, dependence, product experience, health and functioning, and use history), and (3) details how the measurement instruments are made accessible to Open Peer Review

[1]  Annette R. Kaufman,et al.  A review of risk perception measurement in tobacco control research , 2018, Tobacco Control.

[2]  Jennifer L. Pearson,et al.  Harm Minimization and Tobacco Control: Reframing Societal Views of Nicotine Use to Rapidly Save Lives. , 2018, Annual review of public health.

[3]  B. Lindgren,et al.  Evaluating the utility of subjective effects measures for predicting product sampling, enrollment, and retention in a clinical trial of a smokeless tobacco product. , 2018, Addictive behaviors.

[4]  M. Nelly,et al.  Perceived risks associated with the use of tobacco and nicotine-containing products: Findings from qualitative research , 2017 .

[5]  M. Edelen,et al.  Additional validity evidence for the PROMIS Smoking Assessment Toolkit. , 2016, Addictive behaviors.

[6]  M. Edelen,et al.  The Psychometric Performance of the PROMIS Smoking Assessment Toolkit: Comparisons of Real-Data Computer Adaptive Tests, Short Forms, and Mode of Administration. , 2016, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[7]  Micah L. Berman,et al.  Providing a Science Base for the Evaluation of Tobacco Products. , 2015, Tobacco regulatory science.

[8]  M. Edelen,et al.  Methodology for developing and evaluating the PROMIS smoking item banks. , 2014, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[9]  M. Edelen The PROMIS smoking assessment toolkit--background and introduction to supplement. , 2014, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[10]  R. Niaura Delivering on its promises: the PROMIS Smoking Initiative item banks. , 2014, Nicotine & Tobacco Research.

[11]  M. Edelen,et al.  The PROMIS Smoking Initiative: initial validity evidence for six new smoking item banks. , 2014, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[12]  R. Weitkunat,et al.  Assessment of Cigarette Smoking in Epidemiologic Studies , 2013 .

[13]  D. Hatsukami,et al.  Subjective responses to oral tobacco products: scale validation. , 2013, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[14]  K. Fagerström,et al.  Dependence on tobacco and nicotine products: a case for product-specific assessment. , 2012, Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco.

[15]  C. Acquadro,et al.  Linguistic validation manual for health outcome assessments , 2012 .

[16]  N. Leidy,et al.  Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO good research practices task force report: part 1--eliciting concepts for a new PRO instrument. , 2011, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[17]  Elizabeth Molsen,et al.  Content validity--establishing and reporting the evidence in newly developed patient-reported outcomes (PRO) instruments for medical product evaluation: ISPOR PRO Good Research Practices Task Force report: part 2--assessing respondent understanding. , 2011, Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research.

[18]  Graeme Hutcheson,et al.  Rasch Models for Measurement , 2011 .

[19]  Jordi Alonso,et al.  The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: A clarification of its content , 2010, BMC medical research methodology.

[20]  K. Cummings,et al.  Assessing Consumer Responses to Potential Reduced-Exposure Tobacco Products: A Review of Tobacco Industry and Independent Research Methods , 2009, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[21]  D. Hatsukami,et al.  Measures for Assessing Subjective Effects of Potential Reduced-Exposure Products , 2009, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

[22]  John W. Creswell,et al.  Editorial: Exploring the Nature of Research Questions in Mixed Methods Research , 2007 .

[23]  J. Cappelleri,et al.  Confirmatory factor analyses and reliability of the modified cigarette evaluation questionnaire. , 2007, Addictive behaviors.

[24]  Kathleenl N. Lohr,et al.  Assessing health status and quality-of-life instruments: Attributes and review criteria , 2002, Quality of Life Research.