64
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Agreement between self-report questionnaires and medical record data was substantial for diabetes, hypertension, myocardial infarction and stroke but not for heart failure

      , , , ,
      Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
      Elsevier BV

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          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.

          Abstract

          Questionnaires are used to estimate disease burden. Agreement between questionnaire responses and a criterion standard is important for optimal disease prevalence estimates. We measured the agreement between self-reported disease and medical record diagnosis of disease. A total of 2,037 Olmsted County, Minnesota residents > or =45 years of age were randomly selected. Questionnaires asked if subjects had ever had heart failure, diabetes, hypertension, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. Medical records were abstracted. Self-report of disease showed >90% specificity for all these diseases, but sensitivity was low for heart failure (69%) and diabetes (66%). Agreement between self-report and medical record was substantial (kappa 0.71-0.80) for diabetes, hypertension, MI, and stroke but not for heart failure (kappa 0.46). Factors associated with high total agreement by multivariate analysis were age <65 years, female sex, education >12 years, and zero Charlson Index score (P < .05). Questionnaire data are of greatest value in life-threatening, acute-onset diseases (e.g., MI and stroke) and chronic disorders requiring ongoing management (e.g.,diabetes and hypertension). They are more accurate in young women and better-educated subjects.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
          Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
          Elsevier BV
          08954356
          October 2004
          October 2004
          : 57
          : 10
          : 1096-1103
          Article
          10.1016/j.jclinepi.2004.04.005
          15528061
          ab4f59cc-3b2c-461d-b9aa-27ac698cad23
          © 2004

          http://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article