Improving the self reporting of tobacco use: Results of a factorial experiment

Tobacco Control

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2003, Pages 178-183

  Cowling, D W ^a,b   Johnson, T P ^c   Holbrook, B C ^d   Warnecke, R B ^c   Tang, H ^b  

^a MS 555 ^*  (United States)

^b CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT CHICAGO   (United States)

^d PUBLIC HEALTH INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANALYTICAL ERROR; CLASSIFICATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EXPERIMENTATION; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LOGISTIC REGRESSION ANALYSIS; MALE; MEASUREMENT; PREVALENCE; RANDOMIZATION; REVIEW; SELF REPORT; SEX DIFFERENCE; SEX RATIO; SMOKING; SMOKING CESSATION; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION; TELEPHONE TELEMETRY; TOBACCO; ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; MIDDLE AGED; QUESTIONNAIRE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SELF DISCLOSURE; UNITED STATES;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; CALIFORNIA; FEMALE; HEALTH SURVEYS; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREVALENCE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SELF DISCLOSURE; SMOKING;

EID: 1542757115     PISSN: 09644563     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/tc.12.2.178     Document Type: Review

References (19)

1. Siegel M, Biener L. Evaluating the impact of statewide anti-tobacco campaigns: the Massachusetts and California tobacco control programs. J Soc Issues 1997;53:147-68.
2. Gilpin EA, Emery SL, Farkas AJ, et al. The California Tobacco Control Program: a decade of progress, results from the California Tobacco Surveys, 1990-1998. La Jolla, California: University of California, San Diego, 2001.
3. Patrick DL, Cheadle A, Thompson DC, et al. The validity of self-reported smoking: a review and meta-analysis. Am J Public Health 1994;84:1086-93.
4. Hatziandreu EJ, Pierce JP, Fiore MC, et al. The reliability of self-reported cigarette consumption in the United States. Am J Public Health 1989;79:1020-3.
5. Strecher VJ, Becker MH, Clark NM, et al. Using patients' descriptions of alcohol consumption, diet, medication compliance, and cigarette smoking: the validity of self-reports in research and practice. J Gen Intern Med 1989;4:160-6.
6. Velicer WF, Prochaska JO, Rossie JS, et al. Assessing outcome in smoking cessation studies. Psych Bulletin, 1992;111:23-41.
7. Means B, Habina K, Swan GE, et al. Cognitive research on response error in survey questions on smoking. Vit Health Stat 1992;6(5):1-34.
8. Biglan A, Severson H, Ary D, et al. Do smoking prevention programs really work? Attrition and the internal and external validity of an evaluation of a refusal skills training program. J Behav Med 1987;10:159-71.
9. Hansen WB, Collins LM, Malotte CK, et al. Attrition in prevention research. J Behav Med 1985;8:261-75.
10. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Cigarette smoking among adults - United States, 1992, and changes in the definition of current cigarette smoking. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1994;43:342-6.
11. Council of American Survey Research Organizations Task Force on Completion Rates. On the definition of response rates. Port Jefferson, New York: CASRO, 1982.
12. US Department of Health and Human Services. Reducing tobacco use: a report of the Surgeon General. Atlanta, Georgia: US Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, Office of Smoking and Health, 2000.
13. Hosmer DW, Lemeshow S. Applied logistic regression. New York: Wiley, 1989.
14. Rothman KJ, Greenland S. Modern epidemiology. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1998:385.
15. Groves RM, Couper M. Nonresponse in household interview surveys. New York: Wiley, 1998.
16. Krosnick JA. Response strategies for coping with the cognitive demands of attitude measures in surveys. Appl Cog Psych 1991;5:213-36.
17. California Department of Health Services, California Adult Tobacco Survey, 1994-2000. California Department of Health Services, 2000.
18. Comstock GW, Helsing KJ. Characteristics of respondents and nonrespondents to a questionnaire for estimating community mood. Am J Epidemiol 1972;97:233-9.
19. Cotter LB, Zipp JF, Rogins LN, et al. Difficult-to-recruit respondents and their effect on prevalence estimates in an epidemiological survey. Am J Epidemiol 1987;125:329-39.