In sum, this questionnaire development Nilotinib purchase method departs from the traditional approach in which multiple similar items are combined to assess a construct in a reliable manner (Nunnally & Bernstein, 1994; Wiggins, 1973). As noted by Borsboom et al. (2004), items that are highly correlated with one another can be useless for prediction due to multicollinearity (see also Lord & Novick, 1968). The traditional approach was relinquished because we wanted the questionnaire to be brief, we believed that individuals could reliably report on the basis of single items, and previous research showed that relapse reflected the contributions of multiple, often weakly correlated factors.

The Fagerstr?m Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND; Heatherton, Kozlowski, Frecker, & Fagerstr?m, 1991; see also Fagerstr?m, 1978), although developed as a measure of physical nicotine dependence, is probably the most frequently used measure of relapse proneness and physical dependence severity. Evidence suggests that the FTND can predict relapse and can be used to tailor pharmacotherapy (e.g., Alterman, Gariti, Cook, & Cnaan, 1999; Campbell, Prescott, & Tjeder-Burton, 1996; Patten, Martin, Calfas, Lento, & Wolter, 2001; West, 2005; Westman, Behm, Simel, & Rose, 1997; see also Fagerstr?m & Schneider, 1989). However, these findings are not consistent (e.g., Borrelli, Spring, Niaura, Hitsman, & Papandonatos, 2001; Gilbert, Crauthers, Mooney, McClernon, & Jensen, 1999; Kenford et al., 1994; Procyshyn, Tse, Sin, & Flynn, 2002; Silagy, Mant, Fowler, & Lodge, 1994).

Some data suggest that the lion’s share of predictive validity is concentrated in only a subset of FTND items (e.g., the number of cigarettes smoked per day, time to first cigarette; Dale et al., 2001; Heatherton, Kozlowski, Frecker, Rickert, & Robinson, 1989; Razavi et al., 1999; Shiffman, Dresler, Hajek, Gilburt, Targett, & Strahs, 2002; Transdisciplinary Tobacco Use Research Center [TTURC] Tobacco Dependence Phenotype Workgroup et al., 2007). Because the FTND is widely used and tends to predict relapse better than other measures (Breslau & Johnson, 2000; TTURC Tobacco Dependence Phenotype Workgroup et al., 2007), we used it as a comparison measure for the new relapse prediction assay. That is, one criterion for a new measure would be that it has equal or superior predictive validity in comparison to current practice. In addition, we wished to keep the scale brief and ensure that it would be easy to use. As noted earlier, relapse is Brefeldin_A multiply determined, and variables other than those assessed by the FTND may contribute to relapse prediction. The Wisconsin Predicting Patient’s Relapse (WI-PREPARE) questionnaire is an attempt to assess briefly multiple-item domains that contribute to prediction.