ArticlePreventive medicine reports2024
A nationwide mobile phone survey for tobacco use in Tanzania: Sample quality and representativeness compared to a household survey.
Article in Preventive medicine reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Feasibility and Validity of Mobile Phone-Based Proxy Full Pregnancy History (mPFPH) for Estimating Perinatal Mortality in Rural Northwest Bangladesh.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2026Article
- Feasibility of mobile-based noncommunicable disease risk factor data collection using WhatsApp and interactive voice response in Colombia.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Computer-Assisted Mobile Phone Interviews in Low- and Middle-Income Countries Through a Total Survey Error Framework.Public opinion quarterly · 2026Review
- Measuring childhood mortality through mobile phone interviews in Mozambique.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2025Article
- Interactive voice response surveys as a method for increasing the representativeness of rural respondents in a mortality mobile phone survey: Findings from Malawi.Tropical medicine & international health : TM & IH · 2025Article
- Assessing trends in non-coverage bias in mobile phone surveys for estimating insecticide-treated net coverage: a cross-sectional analysis in Tanzania, 2007-2017.BMJ public health · 2025Article
- Tobacco Use and Associated Factors Among Men in Tanzania: Further Analysis of the 2022 Tanzania Demographic and Health Survey Data.Tobacco use insights · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigated the feasibility of an interactive voice response (IVR) survey in Tanzania and compared its prevalence estimates for tobacco use to the estimates of the 'Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) 2018'. IVR participants were enrolled by random digit dialing. Quota sampling was employed to achieve the required sample sizes of age-sex strata: sex (male/female) and age (18-29-, 30-44-, 45-59-, and ≥60-year-olds). GATS was a nationally representative survey and used a multistage stratified cluster sampling design. The IVR sample's weights were generated using the inverse proportional weighting (IPW) method with a logit model and the standard age-sex distribution of Tanzania. The IVR and GATS had 2362 and 4555 participants, respectively. Compared to GATS, the unweighted IVR sample had a higher proportion of males (58.7 % vs. 43.2 %), educated people (secondary/above education: 43.3 % vs. 21.1 %), and urban residents (56.5 % vs. 40 %). The weighted prevalence (95 % confidence interval (CI)) of current smoking was 4.99 % (4.11-6.04), 5.22 % (4.36-6.24), and 7.36 % (6.51-8.31) among IVR (IPW), IVR (age-sex standard), and GATS samples, respectively; the weighted prevalence (95 % CI) of smokeless tobacco use was similar: 3.54 % (2.73-4.57), 3.58 % (2.80-4.56), and 2.43 % (1.98-2.98), respectively. Most differences in point estimates for tobacco indicators were small (<2%). Overall, the odds of tobacco smoking indicators were lower in IVR than in GATS; however, the odds of smokeless tobacco use were reversed. Although we found under-/over-estimation of the prevalence of tobacco use in IVR than GATS, the estimates were close. Further research is required to increase the representativeness of IVR.
Indexed as
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.