ArticlePreventive medicine reports2021
Brief original report: Does smoking status provide information relevant to screening for other substance use among US adults?
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We assessed whether tobacco screening provides clinically meaningful information about other substance use, including alcohol and other drug use, potentially facilitating targeting of screening for substance use. Using data from the Veterans Aging Cohort Study survey sample (VACS; N = 7510), we calculated test performance characteristics of tobacco use screening results for identification of other substance use including sensitivity, specificity, positive-likelihood-ratio (+LR = [sensitivity/(1-specificity)]: increase in odds of substance use informed by a positive tobacco screen), and negative-likelihood-ratio (-LR: [(1-sensitivity)/specificity]: reduction in odds of substance use informed by a negative tobacco screen). The sample was 95% male, 75% minority, and 43% were current and 33% were former smokers. Never smoking, versus any history, indicated an approximate four-fold decrease in the odds of injection drug use (-LR = 0.26), an approximate 2.5-fold decrease in crack/cocaine (-LR = 0.35) and unhealthy alcohol use (-LR = 0.40), an approximate two-fold decrease in marijuana (-LR = 0.51) and illicit opioid use (-LR = 0.48), and an approximate 30% decrease in non-crack/cocaine stimulant use (-LR = 0.75). Never smoking yielded more information than current non-smoking (never/former smoking). Positive results on tobacco screening were less informative than negative results; current smoking, versus former/never smoking, provided more information than lifetime smoking and was associated with a 40% increase in the odds of non-crack/cocaine stimulant use (+LR = 1.40) and opioid use (+LR = 1.44), 50% increase in marijuana use (+LR = 1.52) and injection drug use (+LR = 1.55), and an 80-90% increase in crack/cocaine use (+LR = 1.93) and unhealthy alcohol use (+LR = 1.75). When comprehensive screening for substance use is not possible, tobacco screening may inform decisions about targeting substance use screening.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.