New non-randomised model to assess the prevalence of discriminating behaviour: a pilot study on mephedrone

Abstract

BackgroundAn advantage of randomised response and non-randomised models investigating sensitive issues arises from the characteristic that individual answers about discriminating behaviour cannot be linked to the individuals. This study proposed a new fuzzy response model coined 'Single Sample Count' (SSC) to estimate prevalence of discriminating or embarrassing behaviour in epidemiologic studies.MethodsThe SSC was tested and compared to the established Forced Response (FR) model estimating Mephedrone use. Estimations from both SSC and FR were then corroborated with qualitative hair screening data. Volunteers (n = 318, mean age = 22.69 ± 5.87, 59.1% male) in a rural area in north Wales and a metropolitan area in England completed a questionnaire containing the SSC and FR in alternating order, and four questions canvassing opinions and beliefs regarding Mephedrone. Hair samples were screened for Mephedrone using a qualitative Liquid Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry method.ResultsThe SSC algorithm improves upon the existing item count techniques by utilizing known population distributions and embeds the sensitive question among four unrelated innocuous questions with binomial distribution. Respondents are only asked to indicate how many without revealing which ones are true. The two probability models yielded similar estimates with the FR being between 2.6% - 15.0%; whereas the new SSC ranged between 0% - 10%. The six positive hair samples indicated that the prevalence rate in the sample was at least 4%. The close proximity of these estimates provides evidence to support the validity of the new SSC model. Using simulations, the recommended sample sizes as the function of the statistical power and expected prevalence rate were calculated.ConclusionThe main advantages of the SSC over other indirect methods are: simple administration, completion and calculation, maximum use of the data and good face validity for all respondents. Owing to the key feature that respondents are not required to answer the sensitive question directly, coupled with the absence of forced response or obvious self-protective response strategy, the SSC has the potential to cut across self-protective barriers more effectively than other estimation models. This elegantly simple, quick and effective method can be successfully employed in public health research investigating compromising behaviours.

Innovative Techniques for Estimating Illegal Activities in a Human-Wildlife-Management Conflict

“…In our first fitted model PQ estimates were positively related to RRT response; as farmers' estimates of their peers' badger killing behaviour increased, as too did the probability that they themselves admitted to killing badgers. This finding supports the existence of the false consensus effect [37], [52] and the suggestion made by others [34], [35] that asking respondents about their peers' behaviour, may be a useful way of identifying groups of people involved in socially undesirable behaviours.…”

“…However, studies testing the effectiveness of such indicators by linking them to an actual measure of behaviour are scarce [34], [35].…”

Detection of testosterone and epitestosterone in human hair using liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry

“…100 mg. Hair samples were collected as part of other studies [2,21,[24][25][26]. Hair was cut directly at the skin surface at the vertex posterior of the head.…”

Does Crosswise Method Cause Overestimation? An Example to Estimate the Frequency of Symptoms Associated With Sexually Transmitted Infections in General Population: A Cross Sectional Study

“…Crosswise converts the reporting of concordance/discordance answers into a prevalence estimation of the sensitive response when the non-sensitive question probability is clear (1,3) Application of NRR methods results in reduced errors within the sensitive questions, cost reduction, increased efficiency of data acquisition, and participant engagement increase (4,5). It is believed that crosswise can protect respondents' privacy more than any method other that asks people directly about their sensitive behaviors (6). The social desirability bias leading to underestimated prevalence is controlled more in the crosswise model compared with direct methods and even some indirect methods such as randomized response technique (RRT) and triangular model (7).…”