Solution for Survey Discrepancies in Washington State Smoking Prevalence
Author Information
Author(s): Boysun Michael J, Maher Julie E, Stark Michael J, Pizacani Barbara A, Rohde Kristen, Dilley Julia, Wynkoop Simmons Katrina
Primary Institution: Washington State Department of Health
Hypothesis
The introduction wording in surveys affects reported smoking prevalence.
Conclusion
The modular approach to the BRFSS provided more accurate smoking prevalence data and reduced bias.
Supporting Evidence
- The ATS found lower smoking prevalence than the BRFSS for the years 2000-2002.
- The difference in smoking prevalence became statistically significant in 2001 and 2002.
- The modular approach to the BRFSS has tripled the size of the core questionnaire.
Takeaway
This study shows that how you ask people about smoking can change their answers, and using a better way to ask gives more accurate results.
Methodology
The study compared smoking prevalence data from the Adult Tobacco Survey and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in Washington State.
Potential Biases
The introduction wording may lead to underreporting of tobacco use.
Limitations
The study relies on survey data, which can be influenced by response biases.
Participant Demographics
Noninstitutionalized adults in Washington State.
Statistical Information
P-Value
<.001
Confidence Interval
19.2%–20.6%
Statistical Significance
p<0.001
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website