Calibrating Self-Reported Measures of Maternal Smoking in Pregnancy via Bioassays Using a Monte Carlo Approach

Vanja M. Dukic, Marina Niessner, Kate E. Pickett, Neal L. Benowitz and Lauren S. Wakschlag
Additional contact information
Vanja M. Dukic: Department of Health Studies, University of Chicago, USA
Marina Niessner: Department of Economics, University of Chicago, USA
Kate E. Pickett: Department of Health Sciences, University of York, UK
Neal L. Benowitz: Departments of Medicine, Psychiatry and Biopharmaceutical Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, USA
Lauren S. Wakschlag: Institute for Juvenile Research, Department of Psychiatry, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL USA

IJERPH, 2009, vol. 6, issue 6, 1-16

Abstract: Maternal smoking during pregnancy is a major public health problem that has been associated with numerous short- and long-term adverse health outcomes in offspring. However, characterizing smoking exposure during pregnancy precisely has been rather difficult: self-reported measures of smoking often suffer from recall bias, deliberate misreporting, and selective non-disclosure, while single bioassay measures of nicotine metabolites only reflect recent smoking history and cannot capture the fluctuating and complex patterns of varying exposure of the fetus. Recently, Dukic et al. [1] have proposed a statistical method for combining information from both sources in order to increase the precision of the exposure measurement and power to detect more subtle effects of smoking. In this paper, we extend the Dukic et al. [1] method to incorporate individual variation of the metabolic parameters (such as clearance rates) into the calibration model of smoking exposure during pregnancy. We apply the new method to the Family Health and Development Project (FHDP), a small convenience sample of 96 predominantly working-class white pregnant women oversampled for smoking. We find that, on average, misreporters smoke 7.5 cigarettes more than what they report to smoke, with about one third underreporting by 1.5, one third under-reporting by about 6.5, and one third underreporting by 8.5 cigarettes. Partly due to the limited demographic heterogeneity in the FHDP sample, the results are similar to those obtained by the deterministic calibration model, whose adjustments were slightly lower (by 0.5 cigarettes on average). The new results are also, as expected, less sensitive to assumed values of cotinine half-life.

Keywords: smoking; self-report; bioassay; calibration (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2009
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/6/6/1744/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/6/6/1744/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:6:y:2009:i:6:p:1744-1759:d:5115

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().