NCJ Number
196775
Journal
Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy Volume: 9 Issue: 3 Dated: August 2002 Pages: 267-274
Date Published
August 2002
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This article compares the methodologies of school and household surveys for monitoring substance use among adolescents.
Abstract
The purpose of either the school survey or the household survey is to provide information to both policy makers and health care practitioners and to contribute toward the formulation of evidence-based policies and practices. The pros and cons of the school survey vis-à-vis the household survey are discussed along the dimensions of efficiency considerations (costs, the absence or presence of technical difficulties); validity considerations (whether the context influences the disclosure rate); and generalizability considerations (whether particular groups are missed). The advantages of school surveys are that they are cost effective, offer good protection of the respondents’ anonymity, have high response rates, allow monitoring substance use in minority groups, and are important for school-based interventions. The disadvantages of school surveys are that they must be kept simple, result in cluster samples, are only about students, and truants are partially missed. Conclusions include: (1) the school survey should be preferred when the aim is to study substance use in adolescents; (2) experiments should be carried out with computer-assisted interviewing in school surveys; (3) the school survey can be designed as a cohort study; and (4) more sophisticated data can and should be carried out to exploit the advantages of the school survey more fully. The thrust of these considerations is in favor of the school survey. However, a household survey offers the opportunity to study groups of adolescents that cannot be reached through a school survey. Within the framework of school surveys, there is room for further improvement of both its design and the mode of data collection and analysis. 29 references