Deception among smokers.

Sillett, R. W.; Wilson, Madeleine; Malcolm, Ron; Ball, Keith

doi:10.1136/bmj.2.6146.1185

Cited by 146 publications

(53 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the results for the conditional symmetry model (G2 = 5.4, df= 2) were acceptable. Based upon this model for mothers having smoking cat- egories that were not in agreement (ie off the main diagonal), the probability that the self reported smoking was less than the cotinine categorisation was, on average, 5.36 times more likely than the reverse. This model provides strong evidence that mothers were systematically under-reporting the amount smoked.…”

Section: Reply Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Smoking during pregnancy: how reliable are maternal self reports in New Zealand?

Ford¹,

Tappin²,

Schlüter³

et al. 1997

Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health

162

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Reply Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

Smoking during pregnancy: how reliable are maternal self reports in New Zealand?

Ford¹,

Tappin²,

Schlüter³

et al. 1997

Journal of Epidemiology & Community Health

162

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Cotinine has higher sensitivity and specificity, but carbon monoxide is more convenient to measure and is only modestly less useful.5 Having reviewed the literature using salivary cotinine as a marker for self-reported smoke exposure, Etzel found that sensitivity and specificity of the procedure, when reported, were typically well above 90%. 2 Jarvis et al compared 11 different measures of smoking on a sample of 211 hospital outpatients and found that salivary cotinine had a sensitivity of 95% and a specificity of 82%, whereas carbon monoxide had both a sensitivity and a specificity of 84%.5 In comparing either of these biochemical measures to self-report, there are assumed to be two major sources of disagreement. The first is the error in measurement of cotinine or carbon monoxide, and the second is the error in self-report.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Error in smoking measures: effects of intervention on relations of cotinine and carbon monoxide to self-reported smoking. The Lung Health Study Research Group.

et al. 1993

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVES. Sources of measurement error in assessing smoking status are examined. METHODS. The Lung Health Study, a randomized trial in 10 clinical centers, includes 3923 participants in a smoking cessation program and 1964 usual care participants. Smoking at first annual follow-up was assessed by salivary cotinine, expired air carbon monoxide, and self-report. Each of these measures is known to contain some error. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated by comparing a biochemical measure with self-report to produce an undifferentiated estimate of error. Classification error rates due to imprecision of the biochemical measures and to the error in self-report were estimated separately. RESULTS. For cotinine compared with self-report, the sensitivity was 99.0% and the specificity 91.5%. For carbon monoxide compared with self-report, the sensitivity was 93.7% and the specificity 87.2%. The classification error attributed to self-report, estimated by comparing the results from intervention and control groups, was associated with the responses of 3% and 5% of participants, indicating a small but significant bias toward a socially desirable response. CONCLUSIONS. In absolute terms in these data, both types of error were small.

show abstract

“…Nicotine, carboxyhemoglobin (Sillett et al, 1978), thiocyanate (Butts et al, 1974), and carbon monoxide (Ashton et al, 1981) concentrations in blood have been used as biomarkers to quantify exposure to ETS in direct and passive smokers. Nicotine concentrations in air have been used as an indicator of ETS exposure in many studies (Rothberg et al, 1998).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between environmental tobacco smoke and urinary cotinine levels in passive smokers at their residence

Kim

Lim

Lee

et al. 2004

J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Studies of the health effects of environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) using measured air concentrations are subject to bias. Cotinine, a nicotine metabolite detected in urine, has been recommended as a quantitative measure of nicotine intake and thus as a marker for ETS exposure in humans. The aim of this study was to correlate home indoor ETS levels with passive smokers' urinary cotinine levels. The urinary cotinine concentrations of 57 non-smoking women who spend 419 h a day at home and the nicotine levels in their living room air were measured over a period of 24 h. Nicotine and urinary cotinine levels were analyzed using GC/MS and HPLC/UV, respectively. In addition, information was collected regarding the smoking habits of the subjects' families. A significant correlation was found between the nicotine levels in indoor air and the urinary cotinine to creatinine ratio of the passive smokers. The smoking habits of the subjects' family members were also correlated to the urinary cotinine levels of the passive smokers.

show abstract

Deception among smokers.

Cited by 146 publications

References 4 publications

Smoking during pregnancy: how reliable are maternal self reports in New Zealand?

Smoking during pregnancy: how reliable are maternal self reports in New Zealand?

Error in smoking measures: effects of intervention on relations of cotinine and carbon monoxide to self-reported smoking. The Lung Health Study Research Group.

Relationship between environmental tobacco smoke and urinary cotinine levels in passive smokers at their residence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About