Measurement of passive smoking in adults: self-reported questionnaire or serum cotinine?

R Chen, R Tavendale, H Tunstall-Pedoe
{"title":"Measurement of passive smoking in adults: self-reported questionnaire or serum cotinine?","authors":"R Chen,&nbsp;R Tavendale,&nbsp;H Tunstall-Pedoe","doi":"10.1080/147666502321082746","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Low to moderate agreement between self-reported exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) and serum cotinine levels in non-smokers questions the accuracy of the measurement of ETS exposure. We examined the relationship of serum cotinine to different self-reported ETS questionnaires in a large community-based study.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Subjects were derived from four Scottish MONICA surveys. Agreement between self-reported ETS (yes/no) and serum cotinine levels (> 0, 0) in non-smokers was tested by K, and the difference in cotinine levels among self-reported ETS exposure by ANOVA and the relationship by linear regression.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>None of the values for K was > 0.24 for any ETS questionnaire. In non-smokers with serum cotinine > 0, cotinine levels increased with increasing ETS exposures. In the first and second surveys with the questionnaire of ETS exposure in the last 3 days, standardised coefficients were 0.28-0.39, while in the third and fourth surveys with the questionnaire of a total exposure to ETS at work, at home and in other places the standardised coefficients were 0.19-0.36, with the questionnaire of ETS daily exposure hours, 0.23-0.36. The relationship between self-reported ETS and cotinine levels varied with the questionnaires, and with the time of day of the blood sample collection. In current smokers, cotinine levels were significantly related to both the number of cigarettes smoked daily (the coefficients were 0.13-0.41) and time elapsed since the last cigarette (-0.24 to -0.40).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The findings raise the question of whether it is ideal to take only serum cotinine as an index of ETS exposure in adults, because of time delays between ETS exposure and blood collection, and suggest the combined use of appropriately worded self-reported questionnaires and cotinine levels to estimate ETS exposure.</p>","PeriodicalId":84981,"journal":{"name":"Journal of cancer epidemiology and prevention","volume":"7 2","pages":"85-95"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"43","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of cancer epidemiology and prevention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/147666502321082746","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 43

Abstract

Background: Low to moderate agreement between self-reported exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) and serum cotinine levels in non-smokers questions the accuracy of the measurement of ETS exposure. We examined the relationship of serum cotinine to different self-reported ETS questionnaires in a large community-based study.

Methods: Subjects were derived from four Scottish MONICA surveys. Agreement between self-reported ETS (yes/no) and serum cotinine levels (> 0, 0) in non-smokers was tested by K, and the difference in cotinine levels among self-reported ETS exposure by ANOVA and the relationship by linear regression.

Results: None of the values for K was > 0.24 for any ETS questionnaire. In non-smokers with serum cotinine > 0, cotinine levels increased with increasing ETS exposures. In the first and second surveys with the questionnaire of ETS exposure in the last 3 days, standardised coefficients were 0.28-0.39, while in the third and fourth surveys with the questionnaire of a total exposure to ETS at work, at home and in other places the standardised coefficients were 0.19-0.36, with the questionnaire of ETS daily exposure hours, 0.23-0.36. The relationship between self-reported ETS and cotinine levels varied with the questionnaires, and with the time of day of the blood sample collection. In current smokers, cotinine levels were significantly related to both the number of cigarettes smoked daily (the coefficients were 0.13-0.41) and time elapsed since the last cigarette (-0.24 to -0.40).

Conclusion: The findings raise the question of whether it is ideal to take only serum cotinine as an index of ETS exposure in adults, because of time delays between ETS exposure and blood collection, and suggest the combined use of appropriately worded self-reported questionnaires and cotinine levels to estimate ETS exposure.

成人被动吸烟的测量:自我报告问卷还是血清可替宁?
背景:自我报告的环境烟草烟雾暴露(ETS)与非吸烟者血清可替宁水平之间存在低至中等程度的一致性,这对ETS暴露测量的准确性提出了质疑。在一项大型社区研究中,我们检验了血清可替宁与不同ETS自我报告问卷的关系。方法:受试者来源于四次苏格兰MONICA调查。非吸烟者自我报告的ETS(是/否)和血清可替宁水平(> 0,0)之间的一致性通过K检验,可替宁水平在自我报告的ETS暴露之间的差异通过方差分析和线性回归的关系。结果:所有ETS问卷的K值均不大于0.24。在血清可替宁> 0的非吸烟者中,可替宁水平随着ETS暴露的增加而增加。第1次和第2次ETS最近3天暴露问卷的标准化系数为0.28 ~ 0.39,第3次和第4次ETS工作、家庭和其他场所总暴露问卷的标准化系数为0.19 ~ 0.36,第2次ETS每日暴露时间问卷的标准化系数为0.23 ~ 0.36。自我报告的ETS和可替宁水平之间的关系随着问卷的不同以及血液样本采集的时间而变化。在当前吸烟者中,可替宁水平与每天吸烟的数量(系数为0.13-0.41)和上一次吸烟后的时间(-0.24 - -0.40)显著相关。结论:研究结果提出了一个问题,即由于ETS暴露与采血之间的时间延迟,仅将血清可替宁作为成人ETS暴露的指标是否理想,并建议结合使用适当措辞的自我报告问卷和可替宁水平来估计ETS暴露。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信