Adams Jane, Parkinson Lynne, Sanson-Fisher Rob W, Walsh Raoul A
Discipline of Health Behaviour Sciences, School of Medicine and Public Health, University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308, Australia.
Addict Behav. 2008 Oct;33(10):1291-6. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.06.004. Epub 2008 Jun 11.
Adolescent smoking prevalence is usually assessed via self-complete questionnaires. However, concern has been expressed about the validity of such self-report. One approach to increase validity involves the threat of biological validation, known as the bogus pipeline method (BPL).This study aimed to assess the effects of BPL, using an expired air carbon monoxide monitor, and of questionnaire anonymity on student smoking self-report data. High school students (n=801) were randomly allocated to one of four conditions: anonymous questionnaire+BPL, named questionnaire+BPL, anonymous questionnaire without BPL and named questionnaire without BPL. Overall, 37% of students agreed that questionnaires were a good way to obtain honest answers. In a logistic regression analysis, students in the BPL condition had significantly higher odds of reporting weekly smoking (OR=1.83 95% CI 1.27-2.65) and monthly smoking (OR=1.66 95% CI 1.21-2.28) but not of lifetime smoking compared with non-BPL students. Students in the named questionnaire condition had a significantly higher odds of reporting lifetime smoking (OR=1.49 95% CI 1.08-2.04) compared with anonymous students. Studies assessing current smoking patterns in adolescents should consider incorporating a BPL method.
青少年吸烟率通常通过自我填写问卷来评估。然而，人们对这种自我报告的有效性表示担忧。一种提高有效性的方法是采用生物验证的威慑手段，即所谓的假管道法（BPL）。本研究旨在评估使用呼出气体一氧化碳监测仪的BPL方法以及问卷匿名性对学生吸烟自我报告数据的影响。高中生（n = 801）被随机分配到以下四种情况之一：匿名问卷 + BPL、具名问卷 + BPL、无BPL的匿名问卷以及无BPL的具名问卷。总体而言，37%的学生认为问卷是获得诚实答案的好方法。在逻辑回归分析中，与无BPL的学生相比，处于BPL情况下的学生报告每周吸烟（OR = 1.83，95%CI 1.27 - 2.65）和每月吸烟（OR = 1.66，95%CI 1.21 - 2.28）的几率显著更高，但终生吸烟的几率并非如此。与匿名学生相比，具名问卷情况下的学生报告终生吸烟的几率显著更高（OR = 1.49，95%CI 1.08 - 2.04）。评估青少年当前吸烟模式的研究应考虑采用BPL方法。
