Literature DB >> 1624716

Quality of self-report data: a comparison of older and younger chronically ill patients.

C D Sherbourne1, L S Meredith.   

Abstract

This study examined age differences in the quality of self-report data in patients with chronic disease conditions (hypertension, diabetes, heart disease, depression). Data are from 2,304 patients in three health care systems in Los Angeles, Chicago, and Boston. Results support the idea that self-report health data can be gathered from older and younger patients without significant decrements in data quality. Specifically, results showed: (1) small decreases in the reliability of multi-item measures with age, primarily occurring in balanced scales; (2) little evidence of differences among age groups in response set or the tendency to respond "don't know" or "uncertain," although older patients had a greater tendency to respond in a socially desirable manner; (3) higher item nonresponse in older patients; (4) little variation in item nonresponse by type of question or question placement; (5) generally high panel retention in all age groups, supporting the value of repeated follow-up; and (6) similar known-groups validity across age groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1624716     DOI: 10.1093/geronj/47.4.s204

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Gerontol        ISSN: 0022-1422


  11 in total

1.  The Influence of Respondent Characteristics on the Validity of Self-Reported Survey Responses.

Authors:  Barbara Guerard; Vincent Omachonu; Raymond A Harvey; S Robert Hernandez; Bisakha Sen
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2015-09-15       Impact factor: 3.402

2.  Psychometric qualities of the RAND 36-Item Health Survey 1.0: a multidimensional measure of general health status.

Authors:  K I VanderZee; R Sanderman; J W Heyink; H de Haes
Journal:  Int J Behav Med       Date:  1996

3.  Patterns of unit and item nonresponse in the CAHPS Hospital Survey.

Authors:  Marc N Elliott; Carol Edwards; January Angeles; Katrin Hambarsoomians; Ron D Hays
Journal:  Health Serv Res       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  Cultural differences in functional ability among elderly people in Birmingham, England, and Glostrup, Denmark.

Authors:  K Avlund; M Luck; R Tinsley
Journal:  J Cross Cult Gerontol       Date:  1996-03

5.  Testing the validity of the Euroqol and comparing it with the SF-36 health survey questionnaire.

Authors:  J Brazier; N Jones; P Kind
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  Self-reported parkinsonian symptoms in the EPIC-Norfolk cohort.

Authors:  Lianna S Ishihara; Kay-Tee Khaw; Robert Luben; Sheila Bingham; Ailsa Welch; Nicholas Day; Carol Brayne
Journal:  BMC Neurol       Date:  2005-08-24       Impact factor: 2.474

7.  Design and Methods for a Comparative Effectiveness Pilot Study: Virtual World vs. Face-to-Face Diabetes Self-Management.

Authors:  Milagros C Rosal; Robin Heyden; Roanne Mejilla; Maria Rizzo Depaoli; Chetty Veerappa; John M Wiecha
Journal:  JMIR Res Protoc       Date:  2012-12-17

8.  The Medicare Health Outcomes Survey program: overview, context, and near-term prospects.

Authors:  Nathaniel Jones; Stephanie L Jones; Nancy A Miller
Journal:  Health Qual Life Outcomes       Date:  2004-07-12       Impact factor: 3.186

9.  Consistency between Self-Reported and Recorded Values for Clinical Measures.

Authors:  Joseph Thomas; Mindy Paulet; Jigar R Rajpura
Journal:  Cardiol Res Pract       Date:  2016-01-31       Impact factor: 1.866

10.  Magnitude of the Quality Assurance, Quality Control, and Testing in the Shiraz Cohort Heart Study.

Authors:  Nader Parsa; Mohammad Javad Zibaeenezhad; Maurizio Trevisan; Ali Karimi Akhormeh; Mehrab Sayadi
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-08-11       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.