A Comparison of Remote Versus in-Person Assessments of Substance Use and Related Constructs Among Adolescents

Abstract

Objective: Underreporting of adolescent substance use is a known issue, with format of assessment (in-person vs. remote) a potentially important factor. We investigate whether being assessed remotely (via phone or videoconference) versus in-person affects youth report of substance use patterns, attitudes, and access, hypothesizing remote visits would garner higher levels of substance use reporting and more positive substance use attitudes. Methods: We used the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development^SM [ABCD] Study data between 2021-2022 during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants chose whether to complete assessments in-person (n=615; 49% female; mean_age=13.9; 57% White) or remotely (n=1,467; 49% female, mean_age=13.7; 49% White). Regressions predicted substance use patterns, attitudes, and access, by visit format, controlling for relevant sociodemographic factors. Effect sizes and standardized mean differences are presented. Results: 17% of adolescent participants reported any level of substance use. Youth interviewed remotely reported more negative expectancies of alcohol and cannabis. In addition, those queried remotely were less likely to endorse use), sipping alcohol, eating cannabis), and reported less curiosity or intent to try alcohol, though these differences did not survive an adjustment for multiple testing. Effect sizes ranged from small to medium. Conclusions: Preliminary evidence suggests youth completing remote visits were more likely to disclose negative expectancies toward alcohol and cannabis. Effect sizes were modest, though 37 of 39 variables examined trended toward restricted reporting during remote sessions. Thus, format of substance use assessment should be controlled for, but balanced by other study needs (e.g., increasing accessibility of research to all sociodemographic groups).

Keywords:

• Adolescents
• substance use assessment
• remote assessment
• substance use
• substance use attitudes
• alcohol

Acknowledgments

Pelham was supported by grants from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA055935) and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (AA030197). Wade was supported by National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA050779). Patel was supported by the Banting Postdoctoral Fellowship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). Data used in the preparation of this article were obtained from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development^SM (ABCD) Study (https://abcdstudy.org), held in the NIMH Data Archive (NDA). This is a multisite, longitudinal study designed to recruit more than 10,000 children age 9–10 and follow them over 10 years into early adulthood. The ABCD Study® is supported by the National Institutes of Health and additional federal partners under award numbers U01DA041048, U01DA050989, U01DA051016, U01DA041022, U01DA051018, U01DA051037, U01DA050987, U01DA041174, U01DA041106, U01DA041117, U01DA041028, U01DA041134, U01DA050988, U01DA051039, U01DA041156, U01DA041025, U01DA041120, U01DA051038, U01DA041148, U01DA041093, U01DA041089, U24DA041123, U24DA041147. A full list of supporters is available at https://abcdstudy.org/federal-partners.html. A listing of participating sites and a complete listing of the study investigators can be found at https://abcdstudy.org/consortium_members/. ABCD consortium investigators designed and implemented the study and/or provided data but did not necessarily participate in the analysis or writing of this report. This manuscript reflects the views of the authors and may not reflect the opinions or views of the NIH or ABCD consortium investigators. The ABCD data repository grows and changes over time. The ABCD data used in this report came from the ABCD 5.1 data release (DOI: 10.15154/z563-zd24). DOI can be found at https://nda.nih.gov/study.html?id=2313.

All authors have meaningfully contributed to this manuscript and have read and approved the final version of the manuscript. Authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.