Validity of Drug Use Reporting in a High-Risk Community Sample: A Comparison of Cocaine and Heroin Survey Reports with Hair Tests

Hair specimens were collected from 322 subjects and analyzed as part of an experimental study administering household surveys during 1997 to a high-risk community sample of adults from Chicago, Illinois. Toxicologic results were compared with survey responses about recent and lifetime drug use. Abou...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of epidemiology 1999-05, Vol.149 (10), p.955-962
Hauptverfasser: Fendrich, Michael, Johnson, Timothy P., Sudman, Seymour, Wislar, Joseph S., Spiehler, Vina
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Hair specimens were collected from 322 subjects and analyzed as part of an experimental study administering household surveys during 1997 to a high-risk community sample of adults from Chicago, Illinois. Toxicologic results were compared with survey responses about recent and lifetime drug use. About 35% of the sample tested positive for cocaine, and 4% tested positive for heroin. Sample prevalence estimates of cocaine use based on toxicologic results were nearly five times the survey-based estimates of past month use and nearly four times the survey-based estimates of past year use. With the hair test results as the standard, cocaine and heroin use were considerably underreported in the survey. Underreporting was more of a problem for cocaine than for heroin. Among those who tested positive, survey disclosure of cocaine use was associated with higher levels of cocaine detected in hair. In general, when recent drug use was reported, it was usually detected in hair. When a drug was detected in hair, use was usually not reported in the survey. When heroin was detected in hair, cocaine was almost always detected as well. Am J Epidemiol 1999; 149:955–62.
ISSN:0002-9262
1476-6256
DOI:10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009740