+1 Recommend
0 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      The accuracy of self-reported health behaviors and risk factors relating to cancer and cardiovascular disease in the general population: a critical review.

      American Journal of Preventive Medicine

      Cardiovascular Diseases, epidemiology, prevention & control, Health Behavior, Humans, Neoplasms, Reproducibility of Results, Risk Factors

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          To critically review the literature concerning the accuracy of self-reported health behaviors and risk factors relating to cancer and cardiovascular disease among the general population. A literature search was conducted on three major health research databases: MEDLINE, HealthPLAN, and PsychLit. The bibliographies of located articles were also checked for additional relevant references. Studies meeting the following five inclusion criteria were included in the review: They were investigating the accuracy of self-report among the general population, as opposed to among clinical populations. They employed an adequate and appropriate gold standard. At least 70% of respondents consented to validation, where validation imposed minimal demands on the respondent; and 60% consent to validation was considered acceptable where validation imposed a greater burden. They had a sample size capable of estimating sensitivity and specificity rates with 95% confidence intervals of width +/-10%. The time lag between collection of the self-report and validation data for physical measures did not exceed one month. Twenty-four of 66 identified studies met all the inclusion criteria described above. In the vast majority, self-report data consistently underestimated the proportion of individuals considered "at-risk." Similarly, community prevalences of risk factors were considerably higher according to gold standard data sources than they were according to self-report data. This review casts serious doubts on the wisdom of relying exclusively on self-reported health information. It suggests that caution should be exercised both when trying to identify at-risk individuals and when estimating the prevalence of risk factors among the general population. The review also suggests a number of ways in which the accuracy of individuals' self-reported health information can be maximized.

          Related collections

          Author and article information



          Comment on this article