Search

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the degree of agreement between the Fagerström Test for Cigarette Dependence (FTCD) and the Heaviness of Smoking Index (HSI) in daily smokers admitted to smoking cessation clinics from National Healthcare System in Spain and Argentine Republic. Material and methods: An observational, longitudinal, multicenter study (prospective cohort) conducted in smoking clinics in daily clinical practice. The patients were consecutively included as they attended the consultations. The statistical analysis was descriptive, and correlation and concordance tests as well as analysis and regression models were used. Results: In total, 308 subjects were included [161 women (52.3%)], with a mean age of 51.4 (10.8) years. We found an absence of agreement and the existence of a proportional difference between both tests [Regression coefficient for global series: 0.55 (0.52–0.59) p <.001]. This difference increased as the value of the FTCD score increased; that is, the higher the value of the FTCD score was, the greater the difference in relation to the value of the HSI score. Likewise, Cohen's kappa concordance coefficient, according to various combinations of categorization of both tests, showed that the agreement between these variables was only good. Approximately 20% of the subjects were not classified with the same degree of dependence by the two tests. Thus, a classification mismatch existed. Conclusions: We found an absence of agreement between both tests. These data imply that we should not substitute one test for the other when we analyze nicotine dependence in a population of smokers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective was to compare the impact factor to 2 years of self-citations (IF2Y) with impact factor 2 years without self-citations (IF2YWS) and IF2Y with the impact factor to 5 years (IF5Y) as well as IF2YWS with SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) about journals where they were published articles of excellence in smoking by Spanish authors in the period 2008-2012. The search was conducted in the SCI-E and the SSCI-E on November 25, 2013. Were selected documents that had the h index of the strategy global sample (number of articles that have at least that number of citations) to search using the descriptors "smok *" OR "tobac *". A total of 69 articles by Spanish authors were recovered from 55 journals. We found an almost perfect correlation between IF2Y and IF2YWS, reaching IF2Y the highest values. We also found an almost perfect correlation between IF2Y and IF5Y with good agreement, reaching FI5a highest values with a great variability and heterogeneity between journals. The correlation between IF2YWS and SJR is poor with a low concordance. Systematically, the IF2YWS have always higher values than SJR and both indicators measure, therefore, different aspects, not be extrapolated or interchangeable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective. The objective of this study was to investigate the funding received by papers of excellence on smoking at the global level between 2010 and 2014 through the Web of Science, and to find out if funding is associated with greater impact. Method. We searched the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and the Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) through the Web of Science platform on 20 May 2015 (typology consisting of originals and reviews for the period from 2010 to 2014). The search strategy was “smok*” OR “tobac*.” To select the papers of excellence, we picked those that had an h index (i.e., number of articles having at least that many citations) from among the papers in the overall sample generated by the strategy. Results. Of the 193 papers of excellence on smoking that were identified, 158 had received funding from 279 different financing institutions that intervened 522 times. The funding came primarily from government agencies, private foundations, and the pharmaceutical industry. Public funding declined and private funding increased over the years included in the analysis. Receipt of funding was not associated with greater impact at a later date. Conclusions. Most of the papers of excellence on smoking received external funding primarily from government agencies, private foundations, and the pharmaceutical industry. Public funding has decreased, while private funding has increased. Receipt of funding was not associated with greater impact at a later date. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]