Literature DB >> 15117117

Validity of self-reported information on cancer: determinants of under- and over-reporting.

Jonas Manjer1, Juan Merlo, Göran Berglund.   

Abstract

The first aim of the present study was to assess the validity of self-reported information concerning previous cancer. The second aim was to investigate determinants for under- and over-reporting of cancer. The Malmö Diet and Cancer Study is a prospective cohort study including 28,098 subjects. A questionnaire assessed lifestyle and medical conditions, e.g. previous cancer (yes/no). Cancer follow-up was made using the Swedish Cancer Registry (SCR). Questionnaire information concerning previous cancer was considered as test, and SCR information as golden standard (any tumour in the SCR, and specific sites were investigated). The validity analysis assessed agreement, sensitivity and specificity. Under- and over-reporting were studied in relation to lifestyle and socio-demographic factors. Sensitivity of the questionnaire in relation to malignant tumours was 0.82. It was 0.53 when cancer in situ of the breast and uterine cervix together with benign lesions of the urinary bladder and the nervous system were included in the cancer definition. Under- and over-reporting (in relation to malignant tumours) were more common among women and old people. Obesity, size of household, place of birth, smoking, social participation, educational level, type of employment, alcohol consumption and poor well-being was associated with under- or over-reporting in relation to at least one of the studied endpoints in either men or women. We conclude that there was a considerable disagreement between self-reported information and cancer registry data.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15117117     DOI: 10.1023/b:ejep.0000020347.95126.11

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol        ISSN: 0393-2990            Impact factor:   8.082


  20 in total

Review 1.  Agreement between questionnaire data and medical records. The evidence for accuracy of recall.

Authors:  S D Harlow; M S Linet
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1989-02       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Validity of self-reported cancer history: a comparison of health interview data and cancer registry records.

Authors:  M M Desai; M L Bruce; R A Desai; B G Druss
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2001-02-01       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Validity of self-reported diagnoses leading to hospitalization: a comparison of self-reports with hospital records in a prospective study of American adults.

Authors:  M M Bergmann; T Byers; D S Freedman; A Mokdad
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1998-05-15       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  The Malmö Diet and Cancer Study: representativity, cancer incidence and mortality in participants and non-participants.

Authors:  J Manjer; S Carlsson; S Elmståhl; B Gullberg; L Janzon; M Lindström; I Mattisson; G Berglund
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Prev       Date:  2001-12       Impact factor: 2.497

5.  Cancer disclosure in Japan: historical comparisons, current practices.

Authors:  T S Elwyn; M D Fetters; W Gorenflo; T Tsuda
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  1998-05       Impact factor: 4.634

6.  Underreporting of cancer in medical surveys: a source of systematic error in cancer research.

Authors:  L W Chambers; W O Spitzer; G B Hill; B E Helliwell
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1976-08       Impact factor: 4.897

7.  Invitation to a population-based cohort study: differences between subjects recruited using various strategies.

Authors:  Jonas Manjer; Sölve Elmståhl; Lars Janzon; Göran Berglund
Journal:  Scand J Public Health       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 3.021

8.  Validity of self-reported cancers in a prospective cohort study in comparison with data from state cancer registries.

Authors:  M M Bergmann; E E Calle; C A Mervis; H L Miracle-McMahill; M J Thun; C W Heath
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  1998-03-15       Impact factor: 4.897

9.  Concordance between physicians and their older and younger patients in the primary care medical encounter.

Authors:  M G Greene; R D Adelman; R Charon; E Friedmann
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  1989-12

10.  The Malmo Diet and Cancer Study. Design and feasibility.

Authors:  G Berglund; S Elmstähl; L Janzon; S A Larsson
Journal:  J Intern Med       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 8.989

View more
  17 in total

1.  Validity of self reported diagnoses of cancer in a major Spanish prospective cohort study.

Authors:  C Navarro; M D Chirlaque; M J Tormo; D Pérez-Flores; M Rodríguez-Barranco; A Sánchez-Villegas; A Agudo; G Pera; P Amiano; M Dorronsoro; N Larrañaga; J R Quirós; E Ardanaz; A Barricarte; C Martínez; M J Sánchez; A Berenguer; C A González
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Self-reported skin cancer is unreliable.

Authors:  Ann-Sofie Sonne Holm; Hans Christian Wulf
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-01-20       Impact factor: 8.082

3.  Validation of family cancer history data in high-risk families: the influence of cancer site, ethnicity, kinship degree, and multiple family reporters.

Authors:  Parisa Tehranifar; Hui-Chen Wu; Tom Shriver; Ann J Cloud; Mary Beth Terry
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2015-01-07       Impact factor: 4.897

4.  Breast and colorectal cancer survivors' knowledge about their diagnosis and treatment.

Authors:  Mary Jo Nissen; Michaela L Tsai; Anne H Blaes; Karen K Swenson
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2011-07-07       Impact factor: 4.442

Review 5.  Relations of meaning in life and sense of coherence to distress in cancer patients: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Joseph G Winger; Rebecca N Adams; Catherine E Mosher
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2015-03-18       Impact factor: 3.894

6.  How confident are young adult cancer survivors in managing their survivorship care? A report from the LIVESTRONG™ Survivorship Center of Excellence Network.

Authors:  Jacqueline Casillas; Karen L Syrjala; Patricia A Ganz; Emy Hammond; Alfred C Marcus; Kerry M Moss; Catherine M Crespi; Peiyun Lu; Mary S McCabe; Jennifer S Ford; Linda A Jacobs; Donna Pucci; Steven C Palmer; Amanda M Termuhlen; Lisa Diller; Marci Campbell; Barbara Jones; Debra L Friedman
Journal:  J Cancer Surviv       Date:  2011-11-02       Impact factor: 4.442

7.  Impact of familial risk and mammography screening on prognostic indicators of breast disease among women from the Ontario site of the Breast Cancer Family Registry.

Authors:  Meghan J Walker; Lucia Mirea; Kristine Cooper; Mitra Nabavi; Gord Glendon; Irene L Andrulis; Julia A Knight; Frances P O'Malley; Anna M Chiarelli
Journal:  Fam Cancer       Date:  2014-06       Impact factor: 2.375

8.  Self-report versus medical records for assessing cancer-preventive services delivery.

Authors:  Jeanne M Ferrante; Pamela Ohman-Strickland; Karissa A Hahn; Shawna V Hudson; Eric K Shaw; Jesse C Crosson; Benjamin F Crabtree
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2008-11       Impact factor: 4.254

9.  Multivitamin supplement use and risk of invasive breast cancer.

Authors:  Johanna M Meulepas; Polly A Newcomb; Andrea N Burnett-Hartman; John M Hampton; Amy Trentham-Dietz
Journal:  Public Health Nutr       Date:  2009-12-03       Impact factor: 4.022

10.  Consistency and precision of cancer reporting in a multiwave national panel survey.

Authors:  Anna Zajacova; Jennifer Beam Dowd; Robert F Schoeni; Robert B Wallace
Journal:  Popul Health Metr       Date:  2010-06-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.