Survey estimates of drug-use trends in urban communities: General principles and cautionary examples

Substance Use and Misuse

Volumn 35, Issue 6-8, 2000, Pages

  Beveridge, Andrew A ^a,b   Kadushin, Charles ^b,c   Saxe, Leonard ^c   Rindskopf, David ^b   Livert, David ^b  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^c BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Drugs; Evaluation; Measurement; Sampling; Survey; Trends

Indexed keywords

ILLICIT DRUG;

DRUG ABUSE PATTERN; HEALTH PROGRAM; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; POLICY; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SAMPLING; SUBSTANCE ABUSE; UNITED STATES; URBAN POPULATION;

EID: 0343362687     PISSN: 10826084     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3109/10826080009148426     Document Type: Review

References (39)

1. AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR PUBLIC OPINION RESEARCH (AAPOR) (1998). Standard Definitions: Final Dispositions of Case Codes and Outcome Rates for RDD Telephone Surveys and In-Person Household Surveys. Ann Arbor, MI: American Association for Public Opinion Research.
2. AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION (1996). Task Force on Statistical Inference Initial Report. Washington, DC: Board of Scientific Affairs, American Psychological Association.
3. BEVERIDGE, A., BUCUVALAS, M., KADUSHIN, C., TRIPPEL, K., and LIVERT, D. (1997, May). Targeting Respondents in Small Defined Geographic Areas: Experiences from a Large Scale Telephone Survey. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Norfolk, VA.
4. BUSCEMA, M. (1998). Artificial neural networks and complex social systems. I. Theory Substance Use Misuse 33(1): v xvii, 1 220.
5. BRYK, A. S., and RAUDENBUSH, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods: Newbury Park, CA: Sage
6. CAMPBELL, D. T., and STANLEY, J. C. (1966). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
7. CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION (CSAP) (1996). Fourth Annual Report of the National Evaluation of the Community Partnership Demonstration Grant Program. Rockville, MD: Center for Substance Abuse Prevention, US Department of Health and Human Services.
8. CENTERS FOR DISEASE CONTROL AND PREVENTION (1998). 1996 BRFSS Summary Prevalence Report. Atlanta, GA.
9. COOK, T. D., and CAMPBELL, D. T. (1979). Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
10. DI LIMA, S. N., and SCHUST, C. S. (Eds.) (1997). Community Health Education and Promotion: A Guide to Program Design and Evaluation. Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers.
11. FORT LAUDERDALE SUN-SENTINEL (1996), April 30, p. 1A.
12. FURLONG, M. J., CASAS, J. M., CORRAL, C., and GORDON, M. (1997). Changes in substance use patterns associated with a development of a community partnership project. Eval. Program Plann, 20: 299-305.
13. GENERAL ACCOUNTING OFFICE (GAO) (1993). Drug Use Measurement: Strengths, Limitations, and Recommendations for Improvement. Report to Chairman of the Committee on Government Operations, House of Representatives. Report Number GAO/PEMD-93-18.
14. GUSTIN, JOSEPH (1998, September). Personal communication.
15. HALLEORS, D., RINDSKOPF, D., and STIRRAT, M. (1997). Meta-Analysis of School Surveys to Assess Community Prevention Efforts. Paper presented at the Sixth Biennial CDC and ATSDR Symposium on Statistical Methods. Atlanta, GA.
16. HOLDER, H. D. (1998). Planning for alcohol-problem prevention through complex systems modeling: Results from SlimCom. Substance Use Misuse 33(3), 669-692.
17. JELLINEK, P. S., and HEARN, R. P. (1991). Fighting drug abuse at the local level: Can communities consolidate their resources into a single system of prevention, treatment, and aftercare? Issues Sci. Technol. 7(4): 78-84.
18. JOHNSON, L. D., O'MALLEY, P. M., and BACHMAN, J. G. (1996). National Surrey Results on Drug Use from Monitoring the Future Study, 1975 1995: Volume I (NIH Publication 96-4139). Washington, DC: US Department of Health and Human Services.
19. KADUSHIN, C., LIVERT, D., FORD, J., BARRERAS, R., HOFMANN, J., KELNER, S., and TRUDEAU, K. (1998). Fighting Back Evaluation Survey Codehook, Unpublished report.
20. KADUSHIN, C., REBER, E., SAXE, L., and LIVERT, D. (1998). The substance use system: Social and neighborhood environments associated with substance use and misuse. Substance Use Misuse 33(8): 1681-1710.
21. LIVERT, D., KADUSHIN, C., SAXE, L., BEVERIDGE, A., RINDSKOPF, D., TIGHE, E., HOFFMAN, J., KELNER, S., BARRERAS, R., and FORD, J. (1997). Fighting Back Evaluation Interim Report: Wave II General Population Survey. Report prepared for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
22. MIAMI COALITION FOR A DRUG-FREE COMMUNITY (1994 March). Drug Use and Attitude Survey of the Dade County, Florida Public and Archdiocese Schools. Miami, FL.
23. MIAMI COALITION FOR A DRUG-FREE COMMUNITY (1995, September). Community Partnership Program Close-out Report. Miami, FL.
24. MILLER, P. (1998). Review: Is "up" right? The National Household Survey on drug abuse. Public Opin. Q. 61: 627-641.
25. NEW YORK TIMES (1992). September 1, p. 13.
26. NEW YORK TIMES (1997). April 20, Section 4, p. 4.
27. OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY (ONDCP) (1998). National Drug Control Strategy. Washington, DC.
28. PARTNERSHIP FOR A DRUG-FREE AMERICA (PDFA) NEWSLETTER (Fall 94/Winter 95) p. 1.
29. RINDSKOPF, D., and LIVERT, D. (1998). The Utility of Multi-Level Models in the Evaluation of Community-Based Programs. Unpublished manuscript.
30. RINDSKOPF, D., and SAXE, L. (1998). Zero effects in substance abuse programs: Avoiding false positives and false negatives in the evaluation of community-based programs. Eval. Rev. 22: 76-92.
31. SAXE, L., and FINE, M. (1981). Social Experiments: Methods for Design and Evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
32. SAXE, L., REBER, E., HALLFORS, D., KADUSHIN, C., JONES, D., RlNDSKOPF, D., and BEVERIDGE, A. (1997). Think globally, act locally: Assessing the impact of community-based substance abuse prevention. Eval. Program Prev. 20: 357-366.
33. SHAH, B. V., BARNWELL, B. G., and BIELER, G. S. (1997). SUDAAN Users Manual. Release 7.5. Triangle Park. NC: Research Triangle Institute.
34. SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMHSA) (1995). National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Main Findings (1993). Rockville, MD: Office of Applied Statistics SAMHSA, Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.
35. SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMHSA) (1996a). Estimates of Drug Use Prevalence in Miami from the 1991-1994 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse: Methodological Report (SAMHSA Working Paper, July 15, 1996. Prepared by M. Witt, L. Guess, J. Gfroerer, and D. Wright). Rockville, MD.
36. SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (SAMHSA) (1996b). Preliminary Estimates from the 1995 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. Rockville, MD: Office of Applied Statistics SAMHSA. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.
37. TURNER, C. F., LESSLER, J. T., and GFROERER, J. C. (1992). Surrey Measurement of Drug Use: Methodological Studies (DHHS Publication ADM 92-1929), Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
38. WAKSBERG, J. (1978). Sampling methods for random digit dialling. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 73: 44-46.
39. THE WALLS STREET JOURNAL (1996). September 18, pp. A1, A10.