Email updates

Keep up to date with the latest news and content from SATPP and BioMed Central.

Open Access Methodology

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

Andrea Petróczi12*, Tamás Nepusz3, Paul Cross4, Helen Taft4, Syeda Shah5, Nawed Deshmukh5, Jay Schaffer6, Maryann Shane6, Christiana Adesanwo1, James Barker5 and Declan P Naughton1

Author Affiliations

1 School of Life Sciences, Kingston University, UK

2 Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, UK

3 Department of Biological Physics, Eötvös Loránd University, Hungary

4 School of Pharmacy and Chemistry, Kingston University, UK

5 School of the Environment, Natural Resources and Geography, Bangor University, UK

6 Applied Statistics and Research Methods, University of Northern Colorado, USA

For all author emails, please log on.

Substance Abuse Treatment, Prevention, and Policy 2011, 6:20  doi:10.1186/1747-597X-6-20

Published: 3 August 2011

Abstract

Background

An 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.

Methods

The 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.

Results

The 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.

Conclusion

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:
random response technique; non-random model; Mephedrone; survey; illicit substances; epidemiology