A comparison of tobacco product prevalence by different frequency of use thresholds across three US surveys
Abstract Background With the increasing changes in tobacco use patterns, “current use” definition and the survey used may have important implications for monitoring population use trends. Methods Using three US surveys (2014/15 TUS-CPS, NHIS and PATH), we compared the adult (age 18+) prevalence of f...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
BMC
2021-06-01
|
| Series: | BMC Public Health |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11283-w |
| _version_ | 1818639938535555072 |
|---|---|
| author | Luz María Sánchez-Romero Christopher J. Cadham Jana L. Hirschtick Delvon T. Mattingly Beomyoung Cho Nancy L. Fleischer Andrew Brouwer Ritesh Mistry Stephanie R. Land Jihyoun Jeon Rafael Meza David T. Levy |
| author_facet | Luz María Sánchez-Romero Christopher J. Cadham Jana L. Hirschtick Delvon T. Mattingly Beomyoung Cho Nancy L. Fleischer Andrew Brouwer Ritesh Mistry Stephanie R. Land Jihyoun Jeon Rafael Meza David T. Levy |
| author_sort | Luz María Sánchez-Romero |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background With the increasing changes in tobacco use patterns, “current use” definition and the survey used may have important implications for monitoring population use trends. Methods Using three US surveys (2014/15 TUS-CPS, NHIS and PATH), we compared the adult (age 18+) prevalence of four product groups (cigarettes, other combustibles, smokeless tobacco, and e-cigarettes) based on three past 30-day frequency of use thresholds: 1+, 10+, and 25+ days. We also examined mutually exclusive single, dual, and polytobacco users as a percentage of total users for each product group. Results Regardless of threshold or product, the prevalence was higher in PATH followed by NHIS and TUS-CPS, in some cases by large percentages. The differences in cigarette and smokeless tobacco use prevalence in going from the 1+ to 10+ days and to the 25+ days threshold were minimal. Applying different frequency thresholds had the largest impact on other combustibles prevalence, with a 60% reduction with the 10+ days threshold and a 80% reduction with the 25+ days threshold, compared to the 1+ days threshold, followed by e-cigarettes with 40 and 60% reductions, respectively. The proportion of dual and polytobacco users decreased considerably when using the 10+ vs. the 1+ days threshold and polytobacco use was almost non-existent with the 25+ days threshold. Conclusion The estimated prevalence of each tobacco product use depends largely on the survey and frequency of use threshold adopted. The choice of survey and frequency threshold merits serious consideration when monitoring patterns of tobacco use. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-16T23:03:20Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-a48ab04fa4f047699d7a81bfaf045994 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 1471-2458 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-16T23:03:20Z |
| publishDate | 2021-06-01 |
| publisher | BMC |
| record_format | Article |
| series | BMC Public Health |
| spelling | doaj.art-a48ab04fa4f047699d7a81bfaf0459942022-12-21T22:12:40ZengBMCBMC Public Health1471-24582021-06-0121111110.1186/s12889-021-11283-wA comparison of tobacco product prevalence by different frequency of use thresholds across three US surveysLuz María Sánchez-Romero0Christopher J. Cadham1Jana L. Hirschtick2Delvon T. Mattingly3Beomyoung Cho4Nancy L. Fleischer5Andrew Brouwer6Ritesh Mistry7Stephanie R. Land8Jihyoun Jeon9Rafael Meza10David T. Levy11Department of Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical CenterDepartment of Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical CenterDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public HealthDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public HealthDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public HealthDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public HealthDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public HealthDepartment of Health Behavior and Health Education, University of Michigan School of Public HealthTobacco Control Research Branch, National Cancer InstituteDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public HealthDepartment of Epidemiology, University of Michigan School of Public HealthDepartment of Oncology, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Georgetown University Medical CenterAbstract Background With the increasing changes in tobacco use patterns, “current use” definition and the survey used may have important implications for monitoring population use trends. Methods Using three US surveys (2014/15 TUS-CPS, NHIS and PATH), we compared the adult (age 18+) prevalence of four product groups (cigarettes, other combustibles, smokeless tobacco, and e-cigarettes) based on three past 30-day frequency of use thresholds: 1+, 10+, and 25+ days. We also examined mutually exclusive single, dual, and polytobacco users as a percentage of total users for each product group. Results Regardless of threshold or product, the prevalence was higher in PATH followed by NHIS and TUS-CPS, in some cases by large percentages. The differences in cigarette and smokeless tobacco use prevalence in going from the 1+ to 10+ days and to the 25+ days threshold were minimal. Applying different frequency thresholds had the largest impact on other combustibles prevalence, with a 60% reduction with the 10+ days threshold and a 80% reduction with the 25+ days threshold, compared to the 1+ days threshold, followed by e-cigarettes with 40 and 60% reductions, respectively. The proportion of dual and polytobacco users decreased considerably when using the 10+ vs. the 1+ days threshold and polytobacco use was almost non-existent with the 25+ days threshold. Conclusion The estimated prevalence of each tobacco product use depends largely on the survey and frequency of use threshold adopted. The choice of survey and frequency threshold merits serious consideration when monitoring patterns of tobacco use.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11283-wTobacco productsPrevalenceSurveys and questionnairesUnited States |
| spellingShingle | Luz María Sánchez-Romero Christopher J. Cadham Jana L. Hirschtick Delvon T. Mattingly Beomyoung Cho Nancy L. Fleischer Andrew Brouwer Ritesh Mistry Stephanie R. Land Jihyoun Jeon Rafael Meza David T. Levy A comparison of tobacco product prevalence by different frequency of use thresholds across three US surveys BMC Public Health Tobacco products Prevalence Surveys and questionnaires United States |
| title | A comparison of tobacco product prevalence by different frequency of use thresholds across three US surveys |
| title_full | A comparison of tobacco product prevalence by different frequency of use thresholds across three US surveys |
| title_fullStr | A comparison of tobacco product prevalence by different frequency of use thresholds across three US surveys |
| title_full_unstemmed | A comparison of tobacco product prevalence by different frequency of use thresholds across three US surveys |
| title_short | A comparison of tobacco product prevalence by different frequency of use thresholds across three US surveys |
| title_sort | comparison of tobacco product prevalence by different frequency of use thresholds across three us surveys |
| topic | Tobacco products Prevalence Surveys and questionnaires United States |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11283-w |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT luzmariasanchezromero acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT christopherjcadham acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT janalhirschtick acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT delvontmattingly acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT beomyoungcho acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT nancylfleischer acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT andrewbrouwer acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT riteshmistry acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT stephanierland acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT jihyounjeon acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT rafaelmeza acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT davidtlevy acomparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT luzmariasanchezromero comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT christopherjcadham comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT janalhirschtick comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT delvontmattingly comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT beomyoungcho comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT nancylfleischer comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT andrewbrouwer comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT riteshmistry comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT stephanierland comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT jihyounjeon comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT rafaelmeza comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys AT davidtlevy comparisonoftobaccoproductprevalencebydifferentfrequencyofusethresholdsacrossthreeussurveys |