Error in smoking measures: effects of intervention on relations of cotinine and carbon monoxide to self-reported smoking. The Lung Health Study Research Group
R P Murray, J E Connett, G G Lauger, H T Voelker, R P Murray, J E Connett, G G Lauger, H T Voelker
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.
References
- Biochemistry. 1973 Nov 20;12(24):5025-30
- Am J Public Health. 1989 Aug;79(8):1020-3
- Am Rev Respir Dis. 1981 Jun;123(6):659-64
- Health Psychol. 1984;3(6):563-81
- Am J Public Health. 1987 Jul;77(7):846-8
- Am Rev Respir Dis. 1989 Dec;140(6):1822-4
- Prev Med. 1990 Mar;19(2):190-7
- Am J Public Health. 1990 Sep;80(9):1057-61
- Health Psychol. 1991;10(4):296-301
- Prev Med. 1991 Sep;20(5):574-89
- J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(7):689-95
- Am J Public Health. 1987 Nov;77(11):1435-8
- Arch Environ Health. 1989 Jan-Feb;44(1):53-8
- Prev Med. 1989 Jan;18(1):11-9
- Br Med J. 1978 Oct 28;2(6146):1185-6
Source: PubMed