OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the presence of recall bias in retrospective studies of physical activity and myocardial infarction. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: In 2005, seventy-eight cases who had suffered from a myocardial infarction and 243 control subjects, who had previously participated in the Swedish WOLF (Work, Lipids, and Fibrinogen) study, were asked about their physical activity level during 1990-2005. The answers about recalled past leisure time, occupational, and household physical activity level were compared with physical activity level as reported at the baseline examination of the WOLF study in 1992-1998. RESULTS: The proportion who recalled the same activity level as originally reported ranged from 69% to 96% (cases) and 69% to 89% (controls), and the kappa values ranged from 0.30 to 0.91 (cases) and 0.46 to 0.59 (controls), with the exception of perceived physical workload in household work, which showed low agreement between the originally stated and later recalled activity levels. Some differences were found between cases and controls regarding recall of past occupational activity, indicating the presence of recall bias in this domain of physical activity. CONCLUSION: We cannot preclude the existence of recall bias when using retrospectively recalled information about occupational physical activity in studies of physical activity and myocardial infarction.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the presence of recall bias in retrospective studies of physical activity and myocardial infarction. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: In 2005, seventy-eight cases who had suffered from a myocardial infarction and 243 control subjects, who had previously participated in the Swedish WOLF (Work, Lipids, and Fibrinogen) study, were asked about their physical activity level during 1990-2005. The answers about recalled past leisure time, occupational, and household physical activity level were compared with physical activity level as reported at the baseline examination of the WOLF study in 1992-1998. RESULTS: The proportion who recalled the same activity level as originally reported ranged from 69% to 96% (cases) and 69% to 89% (controls), and the kappa values ranged from 0.30 to 0.91 (cases) and 0.46 to 0.59 (controls), with the exception of perceived physical workload in household work, which showed low agreement between the originally stated and later recalled activity levels. Some differences were found between cases and controls regarding recall of past occupational activity, indicating the presence of recall bias in this domain of physical activity. CONCLUSION: We cannot preclude the existence of recall bias when using retrospectively recalled information about occupational physical activity in studies of physical activity and myocardial infarction.
Authors: Eli Puterman; Aoife O'Donovan; Nancy E Adler; A Janet Tomiyama; Margaret Kemeny; Owen M Wolkowitz; Elissa Epel Journal: Psychosom Med Date: 2011-08-26 Impact factor: 4.312
Authors: Michael D Denkinger; Sebastian Franke; Kilian Rapp; Gudrun Weinmayr; Enric Duran-Tauleria; Thorsten Nikolaus; Richard Peter Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2010-07-27 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Katharina Wick; Oliver Faude; Susanne Manes; Lukas Zahner; Lars Donath Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2018-02-17 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Mette Korshøj; Harald Hannerz; Jacob Louis Marott; Peter Schnohr; Eva Irene Bossano Prescott; Els Clays; Andreas Holtermann Journal: JMIR Res Protoc Date: 2018-04-27
Authors: Ashley Wilder Smith; Kathleen A Cronin; Heather Bowles; Gordon Willis; David R Jacobs; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Richard P Troiano Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-02-28 Impact factor: 3.295