minutes-o.gif (1287 bytes)

Summary of Tobacco Dependence Workgroup

July 18-19, 2002, Washington, DC

Present:

Geof Williams, University of Rochester (Chair)
Trish Jordan, BCC Coordinator
Holly Anne McGregor, University of Rochester
Vic Strecher, University of Michigan
Jackie Stoddard, NCI

 
1. Workgroup Members: Two members were added to the workgroup: Vic Strecher, PI at the University of Michigan, and Jackie Stoddard, NCI. Geof informed us that Chantal Levesque has moved on to other opportunities, and Holly Anne McGregor will be taking her position as project director for the University of  Rochester.

Action:  Trish to add both Vic Strecher and Jackie Stoddard on the workgroup roster on the BCC's Tobacco Dependence home page.

2.

Workgroup History and Goals: Geof spent some time familiarizing our new workgroup members with the background of some of our workgroup activities, as well as our original mission statement and goals.

  
3. Update on Smoking Data: Holly McGregor presented the summary chart, which catalogued smoking outcomes and demographics items for each of the five smoking sites. There were some questions about the completeness of the information presented for the University of Michigan. It appears that we have been working with the Michigan eligibility screener questionnaire, as opposed to the baseline behavior questionnaire.

Action:  Holly to follow-up with Vic Strecher to obtain a copy of his baseline questionnaire. Trish has already sent Holly a copy of the mediator constructs summary for each site. Holly will being coding mediator variables next.

4. Cross-Site Analyses: Vic Strecher expressed his concern about the cross-site analyses that were being discussed. He felt that our current goals would not useful, and would not add anything useful to the literature. Smoking outcomes and mediators have been well documented in the smoking literature, and our small sample size would not be able to add anything new. Geof stated that our workgroup was still in the planing stages, and that we had not yet decided what the best course of action for our data analyses would be. Vic suggested that we may consider "trajectory" modeling (for lack of a better term). This would mean that we code each of the smoking sites' interventions for intensity, mode, delivery, etc. We may then be able to assess what types of interventions impact the most effective mediators for different populations.

Action: We will start discussions about the best way to code BCC interventions. This activity can serve the larger group, too. We will use the five smoking sites as a pilot test for this initiative, and then we can expand it to include all BCC sites.

5. Transbehavioral Outcome: All behavior-based workgroups were asked by the Transbehavioral workgroup to decide upon a common outcome criteria that can be used in any transbehavioral activities that may arise. The workgroup confirmed that our previous decision to use "7-day point prevalence" has not changed.
  
6. Next Meeting: We will resume monthly conference calls after the summer. The first conference call will be scheduled in September. Details to follow.