Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37267260›Full record

ArticlePloS one2023

Was retrospective change measurement conducted with Covid-19 containment inconsistent? Comparing prospective and retrospective change measures using data from a national survey on substance use and addictive behaviors.

Marc Dupuis, Joseph Studer, Matthias Wicki, Simon Marmet, Gerhard Gmel

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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.

Marc DupuisInstitute of Primary Health Care (BIHAM), University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-7580-559X
Joseph StuderService of Addiction Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Matthias WickiInstitute for Research, Development and Evaluation, Bern University of Teacher Education, Bern, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-4255-5931
Simon MarmetSchool of Social Work, University of Applied Sciences Northwestern Switzerland, Olten, Switzerland.
Gerhard GmelService of Addiction Medicine, Department of Psychiatry, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Single-measurement-point data collection to assess change has increased with studies assessing the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and of its containment, despite evidence of its lack of validity. Retrospective change is not equivalent to change in repeated self-reported measures giving raise to questions about the validity of the former. This paper purports to investigate inconsistencies between change measures by confronting retrospective change to information from longitudinally self-reported measures from the C-SURF cohort study. The study sample consists of 2,279 young men who participated in C-SURF between 2020 and 2021, and completed between May and June 2021 a survey covering change in alcohol, cigarette, cannabis and other addictive behaviors related to the pandemic. The aforementioned behaviors were assessed longitudinally at two time points using self-reports, and retrospective change since the onset of the Covid-19 crisis was also assessed at the second measurement time. Information from both prospective and retrospective change measures were confronted to identify inconsistent information for each behavior. Additionally, multiple logistic regressions were performed to assess associations between socioeconomic status, impulsivity, depression, and different indicators of motivation to complete the study and inconsistency between both measures for each behavior of interest. Importantly, inconsistent information in at least one of the investigated behaviors was found in about 90% of the participants. Small associations were found between inconsistency and different factors with a consistent effect of impulsivity. In the absence of evidence of the validity of retrospective change measures, studies relying on retrospective change should be interpreted with caution.

Indexed as

Behavior, AddictiveCOVID-19Substance-Related DisordersAdultHumansMaleProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesSurveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerland

Identifiers

PMID37267260
PMCPMC10237494

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.