Literature DB >> 10661659

The impact of response bias on estimates of health care utilization in a metropolitan area: the use of administrative data.

S A Reijneveld1, K Stronks.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Surveys among the general population are an important method for collecting epidemiological data on health and utilization of health care in that population. Selective non-response may affect the validity of these data. This study examines the impact of response bias on estimates of health care utilization and on risk estimates for utilization in relation to demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, using administrative data on use of health care.
METHODS: Data on registered health care utilization were extracted from a health insurance register and linked to respondents (2,934; 62.7%) and non-respondents (1,744) in a personal health interview survey among adult residents from the lower two-thirds income bracket in Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
RESULTS: Estimates of registered health care utilization are higher if based on respondents only, than if they are based on the entire target sample. This goes for prescription drugs, specialist medical care, paramedical care, dental care and medical aids, but not for hospital care. Most risk estimates of registered utilization for background characteristics (gender, family composition, marital status, year of settlement, affluence of neighbourhood and ethnicity) differ only slightly and without statistical significance. If different, most estimates based on respondents only are somewhat higher. The largest differences are found for age (average overestimation of risks for age groups 35-64 and 65+ years compared to that of 16-34 years: 16% and 17%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: In this study, response bias affects estimates of registered health care utilization but hardly affects risk estimates of utilization by background characteristics.

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10661659     DOI: 10.1093/ije/28.6.1134

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0300-5771            Impact factor:   7.196


  32 in total

1.  The impact of area deprivation on differences in health: does the choice of the geographical classification matter?

Authors:  S A Reijneveld; R A Verheij; D H de Bakker
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Neighbourhood socioeconomic context and self reported health and smoking: a secondary analysis of data on seven cities.

Authors:  S A Reijneveld
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 3.710

3.  National health surveys by mail or home interview: effects on response.

Authors:  H S Picavet
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 3.710

4.  Estimating non-response bias in family studies: application to mental health and lifestyle.

Authors:  Jacqueline M Vink; Gonneke Willemsen; Janine H Stubbe; Christel M Middeldorp; Rozemarijn S L Ligthart; Kim D Baas; Hanneke J C Dirkzwager; Eco J C de Geus; Dorret I Boomsma
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 8.082

5.  Features associated with the non-participation and drop out by socially-at-risk children and adolescents in mental-health epidemiological studies.

Authors:  Rosario Granero Pérez; Lourdes Ezpeleta; José María Domenech
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2007-02-01       Impact factor: 4.328

6.  Determinants of non-participation, and the effects of non-participation on potential cause-effect relationships, in the PART study on mental disorders.

Authors:  Ingvar Lundberg; Kerstin Damström Thakker; Tore Hällström; Yvonne Forsell
Journal:  Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 4.328

7.  Immigrants in the Netherlands: equal access for equal needs?

Authors:  K Stronks; A C Ravelli; S A Reijneveld
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2001-10       Impact factor: 3.710

8.  Measuring use of services for mental health problems in epidemiological surveys.

Authors:  Christine Sevilla-Dedieu; Viviane Kovess-Masfety; Matthias Angermeyer; Ronny Bruffaerts; Anna Fernandez; Giovanni De Girolamo; Ron De Graaf; Josep Maria Haro; Hans-Helmut König
Journal:  Int J Methods Psychiatr Res       Date:  2011-08-07       Impact factor: 4.035

9.  Inequalities in utilisation of general practitioner and specialist services in 9 European countries.

Authors:  Irina Stirbu; Anton E Kunst; Andreas Mielck; Johan P Mackenbach
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2011-10-31       Impact factor: 2.655

10.  The male-female health-survival paradox: a survey and register study of the impact of sex-specific selection and information bias.

Authors:  Anna Oksuzyan; Inge Petersen; Henrik Stovring; Paul Bingley; James W Vaupel; Kaare Christensen
Journal:  Ann Epidemiol       Date:  2009-05-19       Impact factor: 3.797

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.