A comparison of prevalence estimates of smoking, alternative nicotine and alcohol use in Great Britain collected via telephone versus face-to-face: Smoking and Alcohol Toolkit surveys
Buss, V. H.; Kock, L.; Tattan-Birch, H. O.; Jackson, S. E.; Shahab, L.; Brown, J.
Show abstract
Background and AimsDue to the COVID-19 pandemic, the survey mode of the Smoking and Alcohol Toolkit Study, a long-running repeat cross-sectional survey, had to change from face-to-face to telephone interviews. This study aimed to assess similarities and differences in sociodemographic, smoking, alternative nicotine and alcohol use estimates between the two survey modes, to understand the potential impacts of this change in methodology on prevalence estimates and trends over time. DesignAfter COVID-19 restrictions were lifted, we conducted parallel telephone and face-to-face household surveys in March 2022 and in January to March 2024, using a hybrid of random and quota sampling. Data from both years were aggregated. Setting and ParticipantsPeople aged 16+ years living in private households in Great Britain. MeasurementsSociodemographic characteristics, nicotine and alcohol use related estimates and their 95% CIs -- unweighted and weighted -- collected via telephone versus face-to-face in a household. FindingsIn the unweighted analyses, the telephone sample included slightly younger and less socioeconomically advantaged groups than the face-to-face sample. After the samples were weighted, estimates of sociodemographic characteristics and nicotine and alcohol use were generally consistent across methodologies, including daily cigarette smoking (face-to-face: 11.1% [10.1-12.1] vs. telephone: 10.6% [9.5-11.7]), non-daily cigarette smoking (face-to-face: 2.7% [2.2-3.3] vs. telephone: 3.4% [2.8-4.1]), and e-cigarette use among people who smoke (face-to-face: 27.0% [23.5-30.5] vs. telephone: 29.3% [25.4-33.3]). However -- compared with telephone participants -- a lower proportion of face-to-face participants reported currently using e-cigarettes (face-to-face: 6.4% [5.6-7.1] vs. telephone: 10.4% [9.3-11.5]), and a higher proportion reported never drinking alcohol (face-to-face: 31.1% [29.7-32.5] vs. telephone: 25.0% [23.5-26.5]) and never having 6 or more standard drinks on one occasion (face-to-face: 46.6% [44.7-48.5] vs. telephone: 40.2% [38.4-42.1]). More participants provided "dont know" or "refused" responses in the telephone compared with the face-to-face interview, including in response to questions about tobacco use, e-cigarette device type, and the number of standard drinks on a typical day. ConclusionsFace-to-face and telephone surveys generally yield similar estimates of nicotine and alcohol use. However, there may be some underreporting of vaping and drinking in a face-to-face survey conducted in the home compared with telephone.
Matching journals
The top 1 journal accounts for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Moderators of changes in smoking, drinking, and quitting behaviour associated with the first Covid-19 lockdown in England 98%
- Changes in vaping trends since the announcement of an impending ban on disposable vapes: a population study in Great Britain 96%
- Transitions from smoking to exclusive e-cigarette use, dual use, or stopping nicotine use in ALSPAC and their association with modifiable and sociodemographic factors 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Salt warning labels in the out-of-home food sector: online and real-world randomised controlled trials 89%
- Community prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in England during April to September 2020: Results from the ONS Coronavirus Infection Survey 88%
- High seroprevalence of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies among people living in precarious situations in Ile de France 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Associations between vaping and Covid-19: cross-sectional findings from the HEBECO study 94%
- Changes in injecting versus smoking heroin, fentanyl, and methamphetamine among people who inject drugs in San Diego, California, 2020 to 2023 92%
- Testing the association between tobacco and cannabis use and cognitive functioning: Findings from an observational and Mendelian randomization study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Effectiveness of a Text Message Intervention Promoting Seat Belt Use Among Targeted Young Adults: A Randomized Clinical Trial 91%
- Public Preferences for Social Distancing Behaviors to Mitigate the Spread of COVID-19: A Discrete Choice Experiment 88%
- Contributions of occupation characteristics and educational attainment to racial/ethnic inequities in COVID-19 mortality 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- Exploring how an e-cigarette intervention influenced tobacco smoking behaviour in people accessing homelessness services: findings from the SCeTCH trial process evaluation 91%
- Twitter Discourse on Nicotine as Potential Prophylactic or Therapeutic for COVID-19 90%
- Using synthetic controls to estimate the population-level effects of Ontario's recently implemented overdose prevention sites and consumption and treatment services 89%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.