ArticleSubstance use & misuse2022
The Reasons for Betel Quid Chewing Scale (RBCS) for Ex-Chewers: Assessment of Factor Structure, Reliability, Validity and Measurement Invariance across Gender in a Guamanian Sample.
Article in Substance use & misuse, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05782166 (Cross-Cultural Adaptation of a Betel Quid Cessation Program and Evaluation of Its Effectiveness in a Malaysian High-Risk Community), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Cross-Cultural Adaptation of a Betel Quid Cessation Program and Evaluation of Its Effectiveness in a Malaysian High-Risk Community
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- What Motivates Betel Quid Chewers to Quit? An Analysis of Several Cessation-Relevant Variables.Substance use & misuse · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundOver 600 million people chew betel nut worldwide and the behavior is classified by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a Group 1 carcinogen. Having a reliable and valid scale of reasons for chewing betel nut that can be used consistently across gender for both chewers and ex-chewers will assist practitioners to create culturally appropriate risk reduction and cessation programs and address an important public health concern.
methodsA Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), a multigroup CFA for testing measurement invariance (MI), and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) were applied to the RBCS using a convenience sample of (
resultsThe majority of the items in the RBCS were found to be moderately or strongly correlated to each other. The CFA model fit the ex-chewers' data well and the model suggested that the RBCS was found to be reliable and valid. The multi-group CFA showed this scale functions equivalently for both male and female groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.