DRUG USE MEASUREMENT: STRENGTHS, LIMITATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

• NCJ Number: 146254
• Author(s): F Mulhauser
• Date Published: 1993
• Length: 12 pages
• Corporate Author: US Government Accountability Office
• Sale Source: Azimuth Inc.; National Institute of Justice/; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Publication Type: Legislative Hearing/Committee Report
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Statement of Frederick Mulhauser, Assistant Director, Program Evaluation and Methodology Division, US General Accounting Office, before the Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security, House Committee on Government Operations, October 5, 1993

Annotation

The U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) examined the validity of three national drug use studies: National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA), High School Senior Survey (HSSS), and Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) study of booked arrestees.

Abstract

All three studies show a decreasing trend in the overall rate of marijuana use. Since 1985, NHSDA and HSSS have also estimated decreasing cocaine use. DUF data, on the other hand, indicate an overall stable but high rate of cocaine use among booked arrestees. Use patterns for heroin and other opiates are less clearly identified in the three studies due to problems in obtaining access to users of these drugs. Both NHSDA and HSSS have been important in the development of national drug control strategies but have several limitations. The NHSDA excluded groups at high risk for drug use, encountered problems in measuring heroin and cocaine use, and relied on self-reports. The HSSS excluded school dropouts and absentees, yielded questionable estimates of drug use by nonwhites, and also relied on self- reports. Although the DUF employs an objective drug use detection technique (urinalysis), study results cannot be generalized to all booking facilities and geographic areas. The GAO believes NHSDA and HSSS national prevalence estimates are conservative measures of actual drug use patterns and DUF results are limited. Specific strengths and limitations of the three studies are delineated, and recommendations for improving drug prevalence estimates and for studying high-risk groups are offered.