Programs aimed at curtailing crack addiction and HIV transmission rely on self-reporting among users. For example, a common source of data is the National Institute on Drug Abuse’s Risk Behavior Assessment. Its data is used in dozens of studies across the United States. But, what if the data is flawed.
The Risk Behavior Assessment depends on self-reporting from drug users. Can people be relied upon to tell the truth about their drug use? How Was the Data for the Study Gathered? Researchers used urinalysis to test 154 people from four cities who had recently taken the Risk Behavior Assessment in the previous 48 hours. Their urine tests were compared to their answers in order to determine the accuracy of their responses. What Were the Results? Researchers discovered that participants were quite likely to report drug use, unlike people participating in employment or criminal justice settings, where users under report. Respondents mirrored the behavior of treatment seeking populations and were even a little more likely to report drug use than to have their urinalysis test positive. Self-reports and urine testing of crack users matched 86.3 percent of the time. This is slightly higher than the matching (84.9 percent) of heroin users. There were also people who reported using drugs and yet tested negative. These numbers were higher than those who reported no use and tested positive.
What Does This Mean? It’s great news. It means that tests like the Risk Behavior Assessment are accurate measures of behavior and can reliably be used as the basis of studies. According to the research abstract: “self-reported drug use in not-in-treatment, non institutionalized populations is accurate enough for measuring changes in risk behavior practices.” This means that people who treat crack addiction can trust the research that serves as the foundation of their discipline. Also, urinalysis isn’t necessary to double check participants who are asked in a non-threatening fashion and are promised confidentiality. |
|