Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28694063›Full record

ArticlePreventive medicine2017

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

John D Kraemer, Andrew A Strasser, Eric N Lindblom, Raymond S Niaura, Darren Mays

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Preventive medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Message Source Credibility and E-Cigarette Harm Perceptions among Young Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Trial
  3. Influencing Perceptions of Harm of Waterpipe Tobacco Smoking Among One Member of Couples Who Use Waterpipe.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2022
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Testing the Effects of Hookah Tobacco Social Media Risk Communication Messages Among Young Adults.Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education · 2021
    Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Optimizing Warnings on E-Cigarette Advertisements.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2020
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Assessing Attention to Tobacco Warnings With a Heatmapping Task.American journal of preventive medicine · 2023
    Article
  13. Estimating Prevalence of Premium or Traditional Cigar 
Use and User Characteristics Based on Varying Definitions of Use.Nicotine & tobacco research : official journal of the Society for Research on Nicotine and Tobacco · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. E-Cigarette Quit Attempts and Experiences in a Convenience Sample of Adult Users.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Humility and Competence: Which Attribute Affects Social Relationships at Work?International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

John D KraemerDepartment of Health Systems Administration, School of Nursing & Health Studies, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, United States.
Andrew A StrasserDepartment of Psychiatry, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, United States.
Eric N LindblomO'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, DC, United States.
Raymond S NiauraSchroeder Institute for Tobacco Research and Policy Studies, Truth Initiative, Washington, DC, United States; Department of Health, Behavior, and Society, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, United States; Department of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Cancer Prevention & Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, United States.
Darren MaysDepartment of Oncology, Georgetown University Medical Center, Cancer Prevention & Control Program, Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center, Washington, DC, United States. Electronic address: dmm239@georgetown.edu.

Funding

Tissue Culture Shared ResourceP30CA051008 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI Louis M Weiner · 1990 to 2026
$71.5M
Translational Research Support CoreP30ES013508 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Trevor M Penning · 2006 to 2026
$35.3M
Georgetown University Center of Excellence in Regulatory Science and Innovation (CERSI)U01FD004319 · FDA · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI DRETCHEN, KENNETH L, MADHAVAN, SUBHA · 2011 to 2016
$3.8M
Optimizing Graphic Warning Labels To Promote Cessation Among Young Adult SmokersK07CA172217 · NCI · GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY · PI MAYS, DARREN M · 2014 to 2018
$739k
FDA HHS U01 FD004319NCI NIH HHS K07 CA172217NCI NIH HHS P30 CA051008NIEHS NIH HHS P30 ES013508
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInternet-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.

methodsA 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.

resultsThose 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.

conclusionsOur 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.

Indexed as

Data CollectionPublic HealthTobacco UseAdultBehavior, AddictiveCrowdsourcingDrug LabelingFemaleHumansInternetMalePrevalenceSmokingSurveys and QuestionnairesCrowdsourcingTobacco controlYoung adult

Identifiers

PMID28694063
PMCPMC5557015

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.