OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to examine the validity of, and factors associated with, the accuracy of self-report (participant-report and proxy-report) for fractures. DESIGN: Study participants were from the Women's Health Initiative Clinical Trial and Observational Study cohorts. All women were postmenopausal; populations included American Indian, Asian/Pacific Islander, black, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic white. The average length of follow-up was 4.3 years. Self-reported fractures were adjudicated by reviewing medical records. The first adjudicated self-report of fractures for each participant was included in the analysis (n = 6,652). RESULTS: We found substantial variations in validity of self-report by the fracture site. Agreements between self-reports for single-site fractures and medical records were high for hip (78%) and forearm/wrist (81%) but relatively lower for clinical spine fractures (51%). The average confirmation rate for all single-site fractures was 71%. Misidentification of fracture sites by participants or proxy-reporters seemed to be a cause of unconfirmed self-reports. Higher confirmation rates were observed in participant-reports than in proxy-reports. Results of the multivariate analysis indicated that multiple factors, such as ethnicity, a history of osteoporosis or fractures, body mass index, years since menopause, smoking status, and number of falls in the past year were significantly (P < 0.05) related to the validity of self-report. CONCLUSION: The validity of self-reports for fracture varies by fracture sites and many other factors. The assessed validity in this study is likely conservative because some of the unconfirmed self-reports may be due to poor medical record systems. The validity of self-reports for hip and forearm/wrist fractures is high in this study, supporting their use in epidemiological studies among postmenopausal women.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to examine the validity of, and factors associated with, the accuracy of self-report (participant-report and proxy-report) for fractures. DESIGN: Study participants were from the Women's Health Initiative Clinical Trial and Observational Study cohorts. All women were postmenopausal; populations included American Indian, Asian/Pacific Islander, black, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic white. The average length of follow-up was 4.3 years. Self-reported fractures were adjudicated by reviewing medical records. The first adjudicated self-report of fractures for each participant was included in the analysis (n = 6,652). RESULTS: We found substantial variations in validity of self-report by the fracture site. Agreements between self-reports for single-site fractures and medical records were high for hip (78%) and forearm/wrist (81%) but relatively lower for clinical spine fractures (51%). The average confirmation rate for all single-site fractures was 71%. Misidentification of fracture sites by participants or proxy-reporters seemed to be a cause of unconfirmed self-reports. Higher confirmation rates were observed in participant-reports than in proxy-reports. Results of the multivariate analysis indicated that multiple factors, such as ethnicity, a history of osteoporosis or fractures, body mass index, years since menopause, smoking status, and number of falls in the past year were significantly (P < 0.05) related to the validity of self-report. CONCLUSION: The validity of self-reports for fracture varies by fracture sites and many other factors. The assessed validity in this study is likely conservative because some of the unconfirmed self-reports may be due to poor medical record systems. The validity of self-reports for hip and forearm/wrist fractures is high in this study, supporting their use in epidemiological studies among postmenopausal women.
Authors: Shelly L Gray; Andrea Z LaCroix; Joseph Larson; John Robbins; Jane A Cauley; JoAnn E Manson; Zhao Chen Journal: Arch Intern Med Date: 2010-05-10
Authors: Juliet E Compston; Nelson B Watts; Roland Chapurlat; Cyrus Cooper; Steven Boonen; Susan Greenspan; Johannes Pfeilschifter; Stuart Silverman; Adolfo Díez-Pérez; Robert Lindsay; Kenneth G Saag; J Coen Netelenbos; Stephen Gehlbach; Frederick H Hooven; Julie Flahive; Jonathan D Adachi; Maurizio Rossini; Andrea Z Lacroix; Christian Roux; Philip N Sambrook; Ethel S Siris Journal: Am J Med Date: 2011-11 Impact factor: 4.965
Authors: Rebecca L Drieling; Andrea Z LaCroix; Shirley A A Beresford; Denise M Boudreau; Charles Kooperberg; Rowan T Chlebowski; Margery Gass; Carolyn J Crandall; Catherine R Womack; Susan R Heckbert Journal: Menopause Date: 2016-11 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Carolyn J Crandall; Joseph Larson; Nicole C Wright; Deepika Laddu; Marcia L Stefanick; Andrew M Kaunitz; Nelson B Watts; Jean Wactawski-Wende; Catherine R Womack; Karen C Johnson; Laura D Carbone; Rebecca D Jackson; Kristine E Ensrud Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Meryl S Leboff; Rupali Narweker; Andrea LaCroix; Lieling Wu; Rebecca Jackson; Jennifer Lee; Douglas C Bauer; Jane Cauley; Charles Kooperberg; Cora Lewis; Asha M Thomas; Steven Cummings Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2009-01-27 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Jeannette M Beasley; Andrea Z LaCroix; Joseph C Larson; Ying Huang; Marian L Neuhouser; Lesley F Tinker; Rebecca Jackson; Linda Snetselaar; Karen C Johnson; Charles B Eaton; Ross L Prentice Journal: Am J Clin Nutr Date: 2014-02-19 Impact factor: 7.045
Authors: Thomas J Beck; Moira A Petit; Guanglin Wu; Meryl S LeBoff; Jane A Cauley; Zhao Chen Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 6.741