Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-qxdb6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T20:54:20.260Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rethinking an Assessment of Nicotine Dependence: A Sex, Gender and Diversity Analysis of the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2012

Lindsay Richardson ,
Lorraine Greaves ,
Natasha Jategaonkar ,
Kirsten Bell ,
Ann Pederson  and
Ethel Tungohan
Lindsay Richardson*
Affiliation:
British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's Health, Canada. lrichardson@cw.bc.ca
Lorraine Greaves
Affiliation:
British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's Health, Canada.
Natasha Jategaonkar
Affiliation:
Framework Convention Alliance, Canada.
Kirsten Bell
Affiliation:
British Columbia Cancer Agency, Canada.
Ann Pederson
Affiliation:
British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's Health, Canada.
Ethel Tungohan
Affiliation:
University of Toronto, Canada.
*
*Address for correspondence: Lindsay Richardson, British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women's Health, E311–4500 Oak Street, Box 48, Vancouver, British Columbia V6H 3N1.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article assesses whether the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND), adequately reflects sex, gender and diversity related differences in nicotine dependence. Available studies on the FTND were reviewed and a sex, gender and diversity analysis (SGBA) of this instrument was conducted. Results indicate that sex and gender differences in nicotine dependence may undermine the ability of the FTND to present an adequate picture of dependence. Conducting a SGBA on this Fagerstrom test reveals that sex and gender differences likely limit the ability of this instrument to present an accurate picture of dependence in diverse groups. Further research is needed to enhance the sensitivity of the FTND.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Smoking Cessation , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , 01 November 2007 , pp. 59 - 67
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)