Cargando…

Surveying alcohol and other drug use through telephone sampling: a comparison of landline and mobile phone samples

BACKGROUND: Telephone surveys based on samples of landline telephone numbers are widely used to measure the prevalence of health risk behaviours such as smoking, drug use and alcohol consumption. An increasing number of households are relying solely on mobile telephones, creating a potential bias fo...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Livingston, Michael, Dietze, Paul, Ferris, Jason, Pennay, Darren, Hayes, Linda, Lenton, Simon
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3607960/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23497161
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-41
_version_ 1782264168276033536
author Livingston, Michael
Dietze, Paul
Ferris, Jason
Pennay, Darren
Hayes, Linda
Lenton, Simon
author_facet Livingston, Michael
Dietze, Paul
Ferris, Jason
Pennay, Darren
Hayes, Linda
Lenton, Simon
author_sort Livingston, Michael
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Telephone surveys based on samples of landline telephone numbers are widely used to measure the prevalence of health risk behaviours such as smoking, drug use and alcohol consumption. An increasing number of households are relying solely on mobile telephones, creating a potential bias for population estimates derived from landline-based sampling frames which do not incorporate mobile phone numbers. Studies in the US have identified significant differences between landline and mobile telephone users in smoking and alcohol consumption, but there has been little work in other settings or focussed on illicit drugs. METHODS: This study examined Australian prevalence estimates of cannabis use, tobacco smoking and risky alcohol consumption based on samples selected using a dual-frame (mobile and landline) approach. Respondents from the landline sample were compared both to the overall mobile sample (including respondents who had access to a landline) and specifically to respondents who lived in mobile-only households. Bivariate comparisons were complemented with multivariate logistic regression models, controlling for the effects of basic demographic variables. RESULTS: The landline sample reported much lower prevalence of tobacco use, cannabis use and alcohol consumption than the mobile samples. Once demographic variables were adjusted for, there were no significant differences between the landline and mobile respondents on any of the alcohol measures examined. In contrast, the mobile samples had significantly higher rates of cannabis and tobacco use, even after adjustment. Weighted estimates from the dual-frame sample were generally higher than the landline sample across all substances, but only significantly higher for tobacco use. CONCLUSIONS: Landline telephone surveys in Australia are likely to substantially underestimate the prevalence of tobacco smoking by excluding potential respondents who live in mobile-only households. In contrast, estimates of alcohol consumption and cannabis use from landline surveys are likely to be broadly accurate, once basic demographic weighting is undertaken.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3607960
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-36079602013-03-27 Surveying alcohol and other drug use through telephone sampling: a comparison of landline and mobile phone samples Livingston, Michael Dietze, Paul Ferris, Jason Pennay, Darren Hayes, Linda Lenton, Simon BMC Med Res Methodol Research Article BACKGROUND: Telephone surveys based on samples of landline telephone numbers are widely used to measure the prevalence of health risk behaviours such as smoking, drug use and alcohol consumption. An increasing number of households are relying solely on mobile telephones, creating a potential bias for population estimates derived from landline-based sampling frames which do not incorporate mobile phone numbers. Studies in the US have identified significant differences between landline and mobile telephone users in smoking and alcohol consumption, but there has been little work in other settings or focussed on illicit drugs. METHODS: This study examined Australian prevalence estimates of cannabis use, tobacco smoking and risky alcohol consumption based on samples selected using a dual-frame (mobile and landline) approach. Respondents from the landline sample were compared both to the overall mobile sample (including respondents who had access to a landline) and specifically to respondents who lived in mobile-only households. Bivariate comparisons were complemented with multivariate logistic regression models, controlling for the effects of basic demographic variables. RESULTS: The landline sample reported much lower prevalence of tobacco use, cannabis use and alcohol consumption than the mobile samples. Once demographic variables were adjusted for, there were no significant differences between the landline and mobile respondents on any of the alcohol measures examined. In contrast, the mobile samples had significantly higher rates of cannabis and tobacco use, even after adjustment. Weighted estimates from the dual-frame sample were generally higher than the landline sample across all substances, but only significantly higher for tobacco use. CONCLUSIONS: Landline telephone surveys in Australia are likely to substantially underestimate the prevalence of tobacco smoking by excluding potential respondents who live in mobile-only households. In contrast, estimates of alcohol consumption and cannabis use from landline surveys are likely to be broadly accurate, once basic demographic weighting is undertaken. BioMed Central 2013-03-16 /pmc/articles/PMC3607960/ /pubmed/23497161 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-41 Text en Copyright ©2013 Livingston et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Livingston, Michael
Dietze, Paul
Ferris, Jason
Pennay, Darren
Hayes, Linda
Lenton, Simon
Surveying alcohol and other drug use through telephone sampling: a comparison of landline and mobile phone samples
title Surveying alcohol and other drug use through telephone sampling: a comparison of landline and mobile phone samples
title_full Surveying alcohol and other drug use through telephone sampling: a comparison of landline and mobile phone samples
title_fullStr Surveying alcohol and other drug use through telephone sampling: a comparison of landline and mobile phone samples
title_full_unstemmed Surveying alcohol and other drug use through telephone sampling: a comparison of landline and mobile phone samples
title_short Surveying alcohol and other drug use through telephone sampling: a comparison of landline and mobile phone samples
title_sort surveying alcohol and other drug use through telephone sampling: a comparison of landline and mobile phone samples
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3607960/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23497161
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-13-41
work_keys_str_mv AT livingstonmichael surveyingalcoholandotherdrugusethroughtelephonesamplingacomparisonoflandlineandmobilephonesamples
AT dietzepaul surveyingalcoholandotherdrugusethroughtelephonesamplingacomparisonoflandlineandmobilephonesamples
AT ferrisjason surveyingalcoholandotherdrugusethroughtelephonesamplingacomparisonoflandlineandmobilephonesamples
AT pennaydarren surveyingalcoholandotherdrugusethroughtelephonesamplingacomparisonoflandlineandmobilephonesamples
AT hayeslinda surveyingalcoholandotherdrugusethroughtelephonesamplingacomparisonoflandlineandmobilephonesamples
AT lentonsimon surveyingalcoholandotherdrugusethroughtelephonesamplingacomparisonoflandlineandmobilephonesamples