This article focuses on the application of synthetic estimation. It provides a working definition of synthetic estimation and indicates why synthetic estimation of drug use prevalence almost always requires the simultaneous application of other, complementary estimation procedures. A brief review is provided on recent studies in which synthetic estimation, together with other estimation procedures, was used to estimate the prevalence of cocaine and heroin use. The author then presents a discussion of one specific, real-world application of the synthetic estimation approach that was developed for purposes of policy research. This application led to estimates of roughly two million weekly users of cocaine and 660,000 weekly users of heroin in the United States during 1990. The author concludes with a discussion of some policy implications of these and other estimates of drug use prevalence.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BlumsteinA.CohenJ.RothJ.VisherC., eds. 1986Criminal careers and “career criminals.”Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
2.
Bureau of Justice Statistics1988Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics 1988. Washington D.C.: Department of Justice.
3.
Bureau of Justice Statistics1990Prisoners in 1989. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice.
4.
Bureau of Justice Statistics1991Jail inmates, 1990. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice.
5.
ChaikenM.ChaikenJ.1985Who gets caught doing crime? Paper prepared for the Bureau of Justice Statistics, Department of Justice. Washington, D.C.
6.
CooleyP.LinerE.1990Heroin prevalence estimation. Final Report. Task 1, submitted to the National Institute on Drug Abuse. Contract number 271-87-8302.
7.
ElliottD.HuizingaD.MenardS.1989Multiple problem youth: Delinquency, substance use, and mental health problems. New York:Springer-Verlag.
8.
FeuchtT. n.d. An analysis of drug use among female arrestees in DC: The use of cocaine among prostitutes. Unpublished paper. Cleveland, Ohio: Department of Sociology, Cleveland State University.
9.
GoldkampJ.GottfredsonM.WeilandD.1988The utility of drug testing in the assessment of defendant risk at the pretrial release decision. Unpublished draft. Philadelphia: Department of Criminal Justice, Temple University.
10.
GoldkampJ.JonesP.GottfredsonM.WeilandD.1990Volume II: Assessing the impact of drug-related criminal cases on public safety: Drug related recidivism. Unpublished manuscript. The Project to Assess the Impact of Drug Related Criminal Cases on the Judicial Process, Jail Overcrowding and Public Safety. Philadelphia: Temple University.
11.
GoldkampJ.JonesP.GottfredsonM. n.d. Measuring the impact of drug testing at the pretrial release stage: Pretrial drug testing in Milwaukee County, New Castle County and Prince George's County. Preliminary report and evaluation update from the Pima County Program.
12.
GfroererJ.BrodskyM.1991Estimation of drug abuse prevalence in California using the National Household Survey on Drug Abuse. Paper presented at meeting of the Sacramento Statistical Association, 27 March.
13.
HamillD.CooleyP.1990National estimates of heroin prevalence 1980–1987: Results from analysis of DAWN emergency room data. RTI Technical Report. Triangle Park, N.J.: Research Triangle Institute.
14.
HarrisonL.1990The validity of self-reported drug use among arrestees. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
15.
HserY.AnglinD.WickensT.BrechtM.HomerJ.1992Techniques for the estimation of illicit drug-use prevalence: An overview of relevant issues. National Institute of Justice Research Report, NCJ 133786.
16.
HubbardR.MarsdenM.RachelJ.HarwoodH.CavanaughE.GinzburgH.1989Drug abuse treatment: A national study of effectiveness. Chapel Hill: Univ. of North Carolina Press.
17.
HuntD.RhodesW.1992The characteristics of heavy cocaine users. ONDCP Bulletin.
18.
HyattR.RhodesW.1992Price and purity of cocaine: The relationship to emergency room visits and deaths, and to drug use among arrestees. ONDCP White Paper.
19.
JohnsonB.GoldsteinP.PrebleE.SchmeidlerJ.LiptonD.SpuntB.MillerT.1985Taking care of business: The economics of crime by heroin abusers. Lexington, Mass.: Lexington/DC Heath.
20.
LevyP.S.1979Small area stimulation — Synthetic and other procedures, 1968–1978. In Synthetic estimates for small area, ed. SteinbergJ., NIDA Research Monograph no. 24. Washington, D.C.: HEW.
21.
McCallaM.CollinsJ.1990Patterns of drug use among male arrestees in three urban areas. Unpublished paper. Triangle Park, N.J.: Research Triangle Institute.
22.
McNagnyS.ParkerR.1992High prevalence of recent cocaine use and the unreliability of patient self-report in an inner-city walk-in clinic. Journal of the American Medical Association267(8):1106–1108.
23.
MajchrzakA.1984Methods for policy research. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage Publications.
24.
MieczkowskiT.1990The accuracy of self-reported drug use: An evaluation and analysis of new data. In Drugs, crime and the criminal justice system, ed. WeisheitR., Cincinnatti: Anderson Publishing.
25.
National Center for Health Statistics1968Synthetic state estimates of disability. Public Health Service Publication no. 1759. Washington, D.C.
26.
NewmeyerJ.1988The prevalence of drug use in San Francisco in 1987. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs20(2):185–89.
27.
NurcoD.1985A discussion of validity. In Self-report methods of estimating drug use: Meeting challenges to validity. ed. RouseB.KozelN.RichardsL., NIDA research monograph no. 57. Washington, D.C.
28.
RhodesW.1991Using the drug use forecasting system to estimate the prevalence of heavy cocaine and opiate use. Report delivered to the National Institute of Justice, 3 April.
29.
RhodesW.HyattR.1992The price of illegal drugs. Interim report delivered to Office of National Drug Control Policy, 15 May.
30.
RhodesW.McDonaldD.1991What America's uses spend on illegal drugs. An Office of National Drug Control Policy Technical Paper, June.
31.
RhodesW.ScheimanP.CarlsonK., in press What America's uses spend on illegal drugs, 1992. An Office of National Drug Control Policy Technical Paper.
32.
RouseB.KozelN.RichardsL.1985Self-report methods of estimating drug use: Meeting challenges to validity. NIDA Research Monograph no. 57. Washington, D.C.
33.
RossiPWrightJ.WrightS.1978The theory and practice of applied social science research. Evaluation Quarterly2:171–191.
34.
SchmeidlerJ.1991Projecting sample results to substate areas with known population characteristics. In Resource materials for state needs assessment studies, WallackS., (Chair). Washington, D.C.: Office of Treatment Improvements.
35.
SimeoneR.FrankB.AryanZ.1991Social indicator models. In Resource materials for state needs assessment studies. WallackS., (Chair). Washington, D.C.: Office of Treatment Improvements.
36.
SpencerB.1989The accuracy of estimates of numbers of intravenous drug users. In AIDS, sexual behavior and intravenous drug use. ed. TurnerC.MillerH.MosesL., 429–446. Washington, D.C.:National Academy Press.
37.
SmithD.WishE.JarjouraG.1989Drug use and pretrial misconduct in New York City. Journal of Quantitative Criminology5(2):101–125.
38.
ToborgM.YazerA.BellassaiJ., 1988Assessment of pretrial urine testing in the District of Columbia: Analysis of drug use among arrestees. NCJ 116902, microfiche.
39.
ToborgM.BellassaiJ.YezerA.TrostR.1989Assessment of pretrial urine testing in the District of Columbia. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
40.
U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. 1990aHard-core cocaine addicts: Measuring — and fighting — the epidemic. A staff report prepared of the use of the Committee on the Judiciary.
41.
U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary. 1990bDrug use in America: Is the epidemic really over? Summary of findings of a majority staff study prepared for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary.
42.
WishE.1990U.S. drug policy in the 1990s: Insights from new data from arrestees. The International Journal of the Addictions25(3):377–409.
43.
WishE.CuadradoM.MartoranaJ.1986Estimates of drug use in intensive supervision probationers: Results from a pilot study. Federal Probation4.
44.
WishE.O'NeilJ.1989DUF drug use forecasting January to March 1989. Washington, D.C.: Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Research in Action.
45.
YazerT.1990Characteristics of the juvenile urine-testing sample. Memo dated 29 March.
