Editor’s Note: These entries are part of an ongoing drug-related dissertation bibliography being compiled by Jonathon Erlen. They were formerly published in the Social History of Alcohol and Drugs journal but are now periodically featured on the Points blog. For more information, contact Dr. Erlen through the above link.
Lung Cancer Stigma: Associated Variables and Coping Strategies
Author: Criswell, Kevin R.
Abstract: Lung cancer stigma is a burgeoning area of literature, yet two important questions remain unanswered: a) What are the associations between lung cancer stigma and psychosocial outcomes across lung cancer survivors with different smoking histories and b) how would lung cancer survivors describe their experience of coping strategies they utilize to cope with lung cancer stigma. This dissertation presents two studies that seek to answer the above-mentioned questions: a) a quantitative study that describes the rates of Personal Responsibility, Regret, and Medical Stigma and the associations between the above-mentioned constructs and psychosocial outcomes; and b) a qualitative study of coping strategies that lung cancer survivors reported utilizing in response to lung cancer stigma. Results from the quantitative study suggest that, while current and former smokers report significantly greater rates of Personal Responsibility and Regret when compared to never smokers, smoking status did not significantly affect the level of Medical Stigma reported by lung cancer survivors. The most common themes extracted from the qualitative data were coping strategies involving education, avoidance, support, helping others, acceptance, and assertive communication. Further research is needed to investigate exactly how lung cancer stigma relates to psychosocial outcomes As future interventions geared towards lung cancer stigma are developed and tested, it will be important to a) measure lung cancer stigma and its associated constructs (e.g., regret, guilt/shame, personal responsibility) with instruments that are firmly rooted in testable theoretical frameworks, b) track psychosocial outcome variables and their changes as a result of the treatment response via the intervention, c) and observe any differences in how stigma variables (e.g., perceived stigma and internalized stigma) might be associated differently with outcome variables and change over time differently depending on smoking history (e.g., comparing outcomes between ever vs. never smokers).
Publication year: 2016
Advisor: Owen, Jason E.
Committee members: Arechiga, Adam L.; Thoreson, Laura; Vermeersch, David
University/institution: Loma Linda University
An Exploratory Study of the Psychometric Analysis of the Depression/Anxiety Negative Affect (DANA) Scale Used for Progress Monitoring in an Inpatient Substance Abuse Group Treatment Setting
Author: Sharma, Tania
Abstract: Progress monitoring in the treatment of Substance Use Disorders (SUD) has been slowly evolving and has typically relied on a few brief measures such as the Outcome Rating Scale (ORS) and the Session Rating Scale (SRS)/Group Session Rating Scale (GSRS). The Depression/Anxiety Negative Affect (DANA) scale, a recently developed progress monitoring measure, has shown good psychometric properties in individual counseling settings (Meier, 2012). This exploratory, naturalistic study of change in Negative Affect was the first to use the DANA Scale in a SUD inpatient group treatment program. Fourteen therapists at the Stutzman Addiction Treatment Center provided 377 DANA Scale ratings for 33 residents and obtained 305 ORS, 263 GSRS and 26 SRS ratings. The findings of the current study revealed that the DANA scale is a brief progress monitoring measure with adequate reliability for use in SUD individual and group counseling settings. Limitations included inter- and intra-clinician inconsistencies in completing the DANA Scale, resulting in lack of convergent validity with other measures and suggests additional clinician training could improve the utility of the DANA. An important implication of this study was that the DANA Scale provides clinicians an opportunity to track client Avoidance of Negative Affect, and hence, has a unique applicability for an SUD population.
Publication year: 2016
Advisors: Janikowski, Timothy P.; Meier, Scott T.
Committee member: Rutter, Michael E.
University/institution: State University of New York at Buffalo
Department: Counseling, School and Educational Psychology
The Impact of Marijuana Use on Memory in Patients with HIV/AIDS
Author: Skalski, Linda Marie
Abstract: The most robust neurocognitive effect of marijuana use is memory impairment. Memory deficits are also high among persons living with HIV/AIDS, and marijuana use among this population is disproportionately common. Yet research examining neurocognitive outcomes resulting from co-occurring marijuana and HIV is virtually non-existent. The primary aim of this case-controlled study was to identify patterns of neurocognitive impairment among HIV patients who used marijuana compared to HIV patients who did not use drugs by comparing the groups on domain T-scores. Participants included 32 current marijuana users and 37 non-drug users. A comprehensive battery assessed substance use and neurocognitive functioning. Among the full sample, marijuana users performed significantly worse on verbal memory tasks compared to non-drug users and significantly better on attention/working memory tasks. A secondary aim of this study was to test whether the effect of marijuana use on memory was moderated by HIV disease progression, but these models were not significant. This study also examined whether the effect of marijuana use was differentially affected by marijuana use characteristics, finding that earlier age of initiation was associated with worse memory performance. These findings have important clinical implications, particularly given increased legalization of this drug to manage HIV infection.
Publication year: 2016
Advisors: Meade, Christina S.; Sikkema, Kathleen J.
Committee members: Curry, John F.; Moffitt, Terrie E.; Schramm-Sapyta, Nicole L.
University/institution: Duke University
Department: Psychology and Neuroscience