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

Andrea Petróczi; Tamás Nepusz; Paul Cross; Helen Taft; Syeda Shah; Nawed Deshmukh; Jay Schaffer; Maryann Shane; Christiana Adesanwo; James Barker; Declan P. Naughton

doi:10.1186/1747-597X-6-20

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

Andrea Petróczi
, Tamás Nepusz
, Paul Cross
, Helen Taft
, Syeda Shah
, Nawed Deshmukh
, Jay Schaffer
, Maryann Shane
, Christiana Adesanwo
, James Barker
, Declan P. Naughton

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

Abstract

The 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.

Original language	English
Article number	20
Journal	Substance Abuse: Treatment, Prevention, and Policy
Volume	6
Issue number	1
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1186/1747-597X-6-20
Publication status	Published - Aug 2011

Keywords

Allied health professions and studies
account
count technique UCT
designs
epidemiology
illicit substances
mephedrone
metaanalysis
non-random model
noncompliance
random response technique
randomized-response technique
self-protective responses
sensitive questions
social desirability scales
survey
truth serum

Access to Document

10.1186/1747-597X-6-20

Petroczi-A-20167Final published version, 818 KBLicence: CC BY-NC

http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1747-597X-6-20

Cite this

@article{df3846c829d049078eb8a8c15c2316d0,

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

abstract = "The 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.",

keywords = "Allied health professions and studies, account, count technique UCT, designs, epidemiology, illicit substances, mephedrone, metaanalysis, non-random model, noncompliance, random response technique, randomized-response technique, self-protective responses, sensitive questions, social desirability scales, survey, truth serum",

author = "Andrea Petr{\'o}czi and Tam{\'a}s Nepusz and Paul Cross and Helen Taft and Syeda Shah and Nawed Deshmukh and Jay Schaffer and Maryann Shane and Christiana Adesanwo and James Barker and Naughton, \{Declan P.\}",

year = "2011",

month = aug,

doi = "10.1186/1747-597X-6-20",

language = "English",

volume = "6",

journal = "Substance Abuse: Treatment, Prevention, and Policy",

issn = "1747-597X",

publisher = "BioMed Central Ltd",

number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - New non-randomised model to assess the prevalence of discriminating behaviour

T2 - a pilot study on mephedrone

AU - Petróczi, Andrea

AU - Nepusz, Tamás

AU - Cross, Paul

AU - Taft, Helen

AU - Shah, Syeda

AU - Deshmukh, Nawed

AU - Schaffer, Jay

AU - Shane, Maryann

AU - Adesanwo, Christiana

AU - Barker, James

AU - Naughton, Declan P.

PY - 2011/8

Y1 - 2011/8

N2 - The 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.

AB - The 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.

KW - Allied health professions and studies

KW - account

KW - count technique UCT

KW - designs

KW - epidemiology

KW - illicit substances

KW - mephedrone

KW - metaanalysis

KW - non-random model

KW - noncompliance

KW - random response technique

KW - randomized-response technique

KW - self-protective responses

KW - sensitive questions

KW - social desirability scales

KW - survey

KW - truth serum

UR - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21812979

U2 - 10.1186/1747-597X-6-20

DO - 10.1186/1747-597X-6-20

M3 - Article

C2 - 21812979

SN - 1747-597X

VL - 6

JO - Substance Abuse: Treatment, Prevention, and Policy

JF - Substance Abuse: Treatment, Prevention, and Policy

IS - 1

M1 - 20

ER -

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

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this