Literature DB >> 28694063

Crowdsourced data collection for public health: A comparison with nationally representative, population tobacco use data.

John D Kraemer1, Andrew A Strasser2, Eric N Lindblom3, Raymond S Niaura4, Darren Mays5.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Internet-based crowdsourcing is increasingly used for social and behavioral research in public health, however the potential generalizability of crowdsourced data remains unclear. This study assessed the population representativeness of Internet-based crowdsourced data.
METHODS: A total of 3999 U.S. young adults ages 18 to 30years were recruited in 2016 through Internet-based crowdsourcing to complete measures taken from the 2012-2013 National Adult Tobacco Survey (NATS). Post-hoc sampling weights were created using procedures similar to the NATS. Weighted analyses were conducted in 2016 to compare crowdsourced and publicly-available 2012-2013 NATS data on demographics, tobacco use, and measures of tobacco perceptions and product warning label exposure.
RESULTS: Those in the crowdsourced sample were less likely to report an annual household income of $50,000 or greater, and e-cigarette, waterpipe, and cigar use were more prevalent in the crowdsourced sample. High proportions of both samples indicated cigarette smoking is very harmful and very addictive. Comparable proportions of non-smokers and smokers reported cigarette warning label exposure, however the likelihood of reporting that smoking is very harmful by frequency of warning label exposure was lower among smokers in the crowdsourced sample.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that crowdsourced samples may differ demographically and may not produce generalizable estimates of tobacco use prevalence relative to population data after post-hoc sample weighting. However, correlational analyses in crowdsourced samples may reasonably approximate population data. Future studies can build from this work by testing additional methodological strategies to improve crowdsourced sampling strategies.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Crowdsourcing; Tobacco control; Young adult

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28694063      PMCID: PMC5557015          DOI: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2017.07.006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Med        ISSN: 0091-7435            Impact factor:   4.018


  26 in total

1.  Nonnaïveté among Amazon Mechanical Turk workers: consequences and solutions for behavioral researchers.

Authors:  Jesse Chandler; Pam Mueller; Gabriele Paolacci
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2014-03

2.  Framing Indoor Tanning Warning Messages to Reduce Skin Cancer Risks Among Young Women: Implications for Research and Policy.

Authors:  Darren Mays; Kenneth P Tercyak
Journal:  Am J Public Health       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 9.308

3.  Public understanding of cigarette smoke constituents: three US surveys.

Authors:  Noel T Brewer; Jennifer C Morgan; Sabeeh A Baig; Jennifer R Mendel; Marcella H Boynton; Jessica K Pepper; M Justin Byron; Seth M Noar; Robert P Agans; Kurt M Ribisl
Journal:  Tob Control       Date:  2016-12-06       Impact factor: 7.552

4.  PSYCHOLOGY. Mechanical Turk upends social sciences.

Authors:  John Bohannon
Journal:  Science       Date:  2016-06-10       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Exposure and response to current text-only smokeless tobacco health warnings among smokeless tobacco users aged ≥18years, United States, 2012-2013.

Authors:  Israel T Agaku; Tushar Singh; Italia V Rolle; Olalekan A Ayo-Yusuf
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2016-02-15       Impact factor: 4.018

6.  American Spirit Pack Descriptors and Perceptions of Harm: A Crowdsourced Comparison of Modified Packs.

Authors:  Jennifer L Pearson; Amanda Richardson; Shari P Feirman; Andrea C Villanti; Jennifer Cantrell; Amy Cohn; Michael Tacelosky; Thomas R Kirchner
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2016-05-10       Impact factor: 4.244

7.  Tobacco-Product Use by Adults and Youths in the United States in 2013 and 2014.

Authors:  Karin A Kasza; Bridget K Ambrose; Kevin P Conway; Nicolette Borek; Kristie Taylor; Maciej L Goniewicz; K Michael Cummings; Eva Sharma; Jennifer L Pearson; Victoria R Green; Annette R Kaufman; Maansi Bansal-Travers; Mark J Travers; Jonathan Kwan; Cindy Tworek; Yu-Ching Cheng; Ling Yang; Nikolas Pharris-Ciurej; Dana M van Bemmel; Cathy L Backinger; Wilson M Compton; Andrew J Hyland
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2017-01-26       Impact factor: 91.245

8.  A Comparison of Actual and Perceived Sexual Risk Among Older Adults.

Authors:  Maggie L Syme; Tracy J Cohn; Jessica Barnack-Tavlaris
Journal:  J Sex Res       Date:  2016-01-26

9.  Evaluating Amazon's Mechanical Turk as a tool for experimental behavioral research.

Authors:  Matthew J C Crump; John V McDonnell; Todd M Gureckis
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Tobacco product use among adults--United States, 2012-2013.

Authors:  Israel T Agaku; Brian A King; Corinne G Husten; Rebecca Bunnell; Bridget K Ambrose; S Sean Hu; Enver Holder-Hayes; Hannah R Day
Journal:  MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep       Date:  2014-06-27       Impact factor: 17.586

View more
  35 in total

1.  Sources of Awareness of JUUL E-cigarettes in 2 Surveys of Adults in the United States.

Authors:  Meghan Bridgid Moran; Julia Cen Chen-Sankey; Andy Sl Tan; Samir Soneji; Stella J Lee; Kelvin Choi
Journal:  Am J Health Behav       Date:  2019-03-01

2.  Optimizing Warnings on E-Cigarette Advertisements.

Authors:  Jessica L King; Allison Lazard; Beth A Reboussin; Leah Ranney; Jennifer Cornacchione Ross; Kimberly G Wagoner; Erin L Sutfin
Journal:  Nicotine Tob Res       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 4.244

3.  Self-reported Smoking Status, TAS2R38 Variants, and Propylthiouracil Phenotype: An Exploratory Crowdsourced Cohort Study.

Authors:  Allison N Baker; Anjelica M Miranda; Nicole L Garneau; John E Hayes
Journal:  Chem Senses       Date:  2018-09-22       Impact factor: 3.160

4.  Cartoon-based e-cigarette marketing: Associations with susceptibility to use and perceived expectations of use.

Authors:  Matthew G Kirkpatrick; Tess Boley Cruz; Jennifer B Unger; Josseline Herrera; Sara Schiff; Jon-Patrick Allem
Journal:  Drug Alcohol Depend       Date:  2019-06-08       Impact factor: 4.492

5.  Initial development of the Hookah Smoker Scale: Assessing young adults' mental schemas about hookah "smokers".

Authors:  Lilianna Phan; Darren Mays; Kenneth P Tercyak; Andrea C Johnson; Kathryn Rehberg; Isaac M Lipkus
Journal:  Transl Behav Med       Date:  2021-02-11       Impact factor: 3.046

6.  Electronic cigarette dependence and demand among pod mod users as a function of smoking status.

Authors:  Eleanor L S Leavens; Tracy T Smith; Noelle Natale; Matthew J Carpenter
Journal:  Psychol Addict Behav       Date:  2020-04-16

7.  Similarities and Differences in Tobacco Control Research Findings From Convenience and Probability Samples.

Authors:  Michelle Jeong; Dongyu Zhang; Jennifer C Morgan; Jennifer Cornacchione Ross; Amira Osman; Marcella H Boynton; Jennifer R Mendel; Noel T Brewer
Journal:  Ann Behav Med       Date:  2019-03-28

8.  Development and Pretesting of Risk-Based Mobile Multimedia Message Content for Young Adult Hookah Use.

Authors:  Andrea C Johnson; Isaac Lipkus; Kenneth P Tercyak; George Luta; Kathryn Rehberg; Lilianna Phan; Lorien C Abroms; Darren Mays
Journal:  Health Educ Behav       Date:  2019-12

9.  Perceived Effectiveness of Anti-Marijuana Messages in Adult Users and Nonusers: An Examination of Responses to Messages About Marijuana's Effects on Cognitive Performance, Driving, and Health.

Authors:  Elise M Stevens; Amy M Cohn; Andrea C Villanti; Glenn Leshner; Amelia Wedel; Theodore L Wagener
Journal:  J Stud Alcohol Drugs       Date:  2019-07       Impact factor: 2.582

10.  Rating the Valence of Media Content about Electronic Cigarettes Using Crowdsourcing: Testing Rater Instructions and Estimating the Optimal Number of Raters.

Authors:  Stella Juhyun Lee; Jiaying Liu; Laura A Gibson; Robert C Hornik
Journal:  Health Commun       Date:  2019-12-13
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.