Error in smoking measures: Effects of intervention on relations of cotinine and carbon monoxide to self-reported smoking

178Citations
Citations of this article
52Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives. Sources of measurement error in assessing smoking status are examined. Methods. The Lung Health Study, a randomized trial in 10 clinical centers, includes 3923 participants in a smoking cessation program and 1964 usual care participants. Smoking at first annual follow-up was assessed by salivary cotinine, expired air carbon monoxide, and self-report. Each of these measures is known to contain some error. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated by comparing a biochemical measure with self-report to produce an undifferentiated estimate of error. Classification error rates due to imprecision of the biochemical measures and to the error in self-report were estimated separately. Results. For cotinine compared with self-report, the sensitivity was 99.0% and the specificity 91.5%. For carbon monoxide compared with self-report, the sensitivity was 93.7% and the specificity 87.2%. The classification error attributed to self-report, estimated by comparing the results from intervention and control groups, was associated with the responses of 3% and 5% of participants, indicating a small but significant bias toward a socially desirable response. Conclusions. In absolute terms in these data, both types of error were small.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Murray, R. P., Connett, J. E., Lauger, G. G., & Voelker, H. T. (1993). Error in smoking measures: Effects of intervention on relations of cotinine and carbon monoxide to self-reported smoking. American Journal of Public Health, 83(9), 1251–1257. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.83.9.1251

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free