Dataset Information

Testing the validity of national drug surveys: comparison between a general population cohort and household surveys.

ABSTRACT:

Background and aims

There are concerns that national population-based estimates of illicit drug use are underestimated. We investigated this by comparing estimates of illicit substance use at age 24 from the Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) with a birth cohort (Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, ALSPAC) and by comparing the Smoking and Alcohol Toolkit Studies (STS/ATS) to ALSPAC.

Design

Cross-sectional household survey and cross-sectional data from one wave of a longitudinal birth cohort.

Setting

England and Wales.

Participants

Young adults aged 23-25 reporting on substance use in 2017 to CSEW (n = 1165), ALSPAC (n = 3389) and STS/ATS (n = 950).

Measurements

Lifetime and past-year illicit drug use, smoking status and hazardous drinking at age 24.

Findings

The 2017 CSEW estimate of lifetime illicit drug use was 40.6%, compared with 62.8% in ALSPAC (risk difference % [RD%] = 22.2%; 95% CI = 18.9-25.5%; P ≤ 0.001). The RD in lifetime use between ALSPAC and the CSEW was 23.2% (95% CI = 20.0-26.4%) for cannabis, 16.9% (95% CI = 14.4-19.4%) for powder cocaine and 24.8% (95% CI = 22.6-27.0%) for amphetamine. Past-year drug use was 16.4% in CSEW, compared with 36.7% in ALSPAC (RD% = 20.3%; 95% CI = 17.6-23.0%; P ≤ 0.001). For past-year substance use, the RD between ALSPAC and the CSEW was 15.4% (95% CI = 12.9-17.9%) for cannabis, 14.8% (95% CI = 13.0%-16.6%) for powder cocaine and 15.9% (95% CI = 14.5-17.4%) for amphetamine. Levels of current smoking were similar between STS (27.4%) and ALSPAC (29.4%). Hazardous drinking was substantially higher in ALSPAC (60.3%) than the ATS (32.1%; RD% = 28.2%; 95% CI = 24.8-31.6%; P ≤ 0.001).

Conclusions

The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children provides one source of validation for measurements of drug use in government household surveys and indicates that illicit drug use may be underestimated in the Crime Survey for England and Wales.

SUBMITTER: Charles H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8359398 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAccurate national information on dietary intakes, including heterogeneity among individuals, is critical to inform health implications and policy priorities. In low- and middle-income countries, household expenditure surveys constitute the major source of food data, but with uncertain validity for individual-level intakes.ObjectiveTo investigate how individualized dietary consumption estimated from household survey data compared with individual-level 24-hr dietary recalls (24hR); and to assess potential heterogeneity by method for individualizing household intakes, dietary indicator, and individual characteristics (age, sex, education, religion, household income).MethodsWe evaluated data from the 2011-2012 Bangladesh Household Integrated Survey (BIHS), which included household-level consumption data (5,503 households) and individual-level dietary data based on 24hR from these households (22,173 participants). Household and 24hR estimates were standardized and harmonized for 33 dietary indicators, including 9 food groups, total energy, 8 macronutrients, and 15 micronutrients. Individual consumption was estimated from household data using two approaches, the Adult Male Equivalent (AME) and per capita (PC) approach. For each dietary indicator, differences in household vs. individual mean estimates were evaluated overall and by strata of individual characteristics, using Spearman's correlations and univariate and multivariate linear regression models.ResultsIndividualized household estimates overestimated individual intakes from 24hR for all dietary factors using either estimation method (P<0.001 for each), except for starchy vegetables (AME: P = 0.15; PC: P = 0.85). For foods, overestimation ranged from 4% for seafood to about 240% for fruits, and for nutrients from 11% for carbohydrates and poly-unsaturated fats to 55% for vitamin C, with similar overestimation for the AME and the PC method. By strata, overestimation was modestly higher in men vs. women, in children (0-10y) vs. adolescents (11-19y) and adults (20-44y, ?45y), among adults of higher (?6y) vs. lower (<6y) education, in Muslims vs. other religions (Christians, Hindus), and for the lowest vs. all other income groups. This overestimation was notably higher in young children (0-5y) vs. all other age groups and in the lowest vs. all other income groups. Underestimation was rarely observed, for example for milk intake (-56%) in young children (0-5y). The PC approach did not capture heterogeneity in validity of estimation of different dietary factors by age, mainly in children (0-5y, 6-10y). Spearman's correlations between individualized household estimates and 24hR data were higher for the AME (0.30-0.70) than PC (0.20-0.50) approach. Findings were similar with and without multivariate regression, with proportions of variance (R2) in 24hR intakes explained by the AME being generally greater than PC estimates, yet still low to modest.ConclusionsIn this national survey, established methods for estimating individual level intakes from household surveys produce overestimation of intakes of nearly all dietary indicators, with significant variation depending on the dietary factor and modest variation depending on individual characteristics. These findings suggest a need for new methods to estimate individual-level consumption from household survey estimates.

Project description:BackgroundEmerging data show that many low-income and middle-income country (LMIC) health systems struggle to consistently provide good-quality care. Although monitoring of inequalities in access to health services has been the focus of major international efforts, inequalities in health-care quality have not been systematically examined.MethodsUsing the most recent (2007-16) Demographic and Health Surveys and Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys in 91 LMICs, we described antenatal care quality based on receipt of three essential services (blood pressure monitoring and urine and blood testing) among women who had at least one visit with a skilled antenatal-care provider. We compared quality across country income groups and quantified within-country wealth-related inequalities using the slope and relative indices of inequality. We summarised inequalities using random-effects meta-analyses and assessed the extent to which other geographical and sociodemographic factors could explain these inequalities.FindingsGlobally, 72·9% (95% CI 69·1-76·8) of women who used antenatal care reported blood pressure monitoring and urine and blood testing; this number ranged from 6·3% in Burundi to 100·0% in Belarus. Antenatal care quality lagged behind antenatal care coverage the most in low-income countries, where 86·6% (83·4-89·7) of women accessed care but only 53·8% (44·3-63·3) reported receiving the three services. Receipt of the three services was correlated with gross domestic product per capita and was 40 percentage points higher in upper-middle-income countries compared with low-income countries. Within countries, the wealthiest women were on average four times more likely to report good quality care than the poorest (relative index of inequality 4·01, 95% CI 3·90-4·13). Substantial inequality remained after adjustment for subnational region, urban residence, maternal age, education, and number of antenatal care visits (3·20, 3·11-3·30).InterpretationMany LMICs that have reached high levels of antenatal care coverage had much lower and inequitable levels of quality. Achieving ambitious maternal, newborn, and child health goals will require greater focus on the quality of health services and their equitable distribution. Equity in effective coverage should be used as the new metric to monitor progress towards universal health coverage.FundingBill & Melinda Gates Foundation.