Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41602091›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2025

Substance use assessment: comparing self-reports with objective data in a research setting.

Alicja Anna Binkowska, Piotr Pałczyński, Natalia Jakubowska, Jakub Czarny, Michał Raczkowski, Aneta Brzezicka

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2025. 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

6 authors.

Alicja Anna BinkowskaInstitute of Psychology, Humanitas University, Sosnowiec, Poland.
Piotr PałczyńskiInstitute of Psychology, Humanitas University, Sosnowiec, Poland.
Natalia JakubowskaNeurocognitive Research Center, Institute of Psychology, SWPS University, Warsaw, Poland.
Jakub CzarnyInstitute of Forensic Genetics, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Michał RaczkowskiInstitute of Forensic Genetics, Bydgoszcz, Poland.
Aneta BrzezickaNeurocognitive Research Center, Institute of Psychology, SWPS University, Warsaw, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Accurate assessment of substance use is essential in public health, clinical, and research settings. While self-reports are widely used, they are prone to biases such as social desirability and recall errors. Objective biological measures, such as hair toxicology, offer a longer detection window and may improve data validity. This study examined the concordance between self-reported substance use and hair toxicology results, with a particular focus on cannabis. It also explored the prevalence and predictors of underreporting, and the relationship between cannabis use patterns and THC detection in hair. Data were collected from 75 adult participants. Self-reported substance use was assessed via questionnaire, and hair samples were analyzed using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) to detect drug use over the prior 3 months. Underreporting was defined as a negative self-report with a positive hair test. Results showed that 21.3% of participants underreported use of at least one substance. While group differences were not statistically significant, moderate-to-large effect sizes were observed, these effect sizes are descriptive in nature and may reflect possible discordance for substances such as MDMA and cocaine. No sociodemographic factors or alcohol use patterns significantly predicted underreporting. However, self-reported cannabis use frequency and quantity were significant predictors of THC detection, while years of use and time since last use were not. These findings highlight the limitations of relying solely on self-reports and emphasize the value of integrating objective biological measures. A combined approach improves the accuracy of substance use assessment and helps address underreporting biases, particularly in settings where legal or social pressures may influence disclosure.

Indexed as

HairSelf ReportSubstance Abuse DetectionSubstance-Related DisordersAdolescentAdultChromatography, LiquidFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultbiological datadrug usehair sampleobjective dataself-report data

Identifiers

PMID41602091
PMCPMC12832719

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.