BACKGROUND: Few studies have reported the accuracy of measures used to assess sun-protection practices. Valid measures are critical to the internal validity and use of skin cancer control research. OBJECTIVES: We sought to validate self-reported covering-up practices of pool-goers. METHODS: A total of 162 lifeguards and 201 parent/child pairs from 16 pools in 4 metropolitan regions in the United States completed a survey and a 4-day sun-habits diary. Observations of sun-protective behaviors were conducted on two occasions. RESULTS: Agreement between observations and diaries ranged from slight to substantial, with most values in the fair to moderate range. Highest agreement was observed for parent hat use (kappa = 0.58-0.70). There was no systematic pattern of over- or under-reporting among the 3 study groups. LIMITATIONS: Potential reactivity and a relatively affluent sample are limitations. CONCLUSION: There was little over-reporting and no systematic bias, which increases confidence in reliance on verbal reports of these behaviors in surveys and intervention research.
BACKGROUND: Few studies have reported the accuracy of measures used to assess sun-protection practices. Valid measures are critical to the internal validity and use of skin cancer control research. OBJECTIVES: We sought to validate self-reported covering-up practices of pool-goers. METHODS: A total of 162 lifeguards and 201 parent/child pairs from 16 pools in 4 metropolitan regions in the United States completed a survey and a 4-day sun-habits diary. Observations of sun-protective behaviors were conducted on two occasions. RESULTS: Agreement between observations and diaries ranged from slight to substantial, with most values in the fair to moderate range. Highest agreement was observed for parent hat use (kappa = 0.58-0.70). There was no systematic pattern of over- or under-reporting among the 3 study groups. LIMITATIONS: Potential reactivity and a relatively affluent sample are limitations. CONCLUSION: There was little over-reporting and no systematic bias, which increases confidence in reliance on verbal reports of these behaviors in surveys and intervention research.
Authors: Sam S Oh; Joni A Mayer; Elizabeth C Lewis; Donald J Slymen; James F Sallis; John P Elder; Laura Eckhardt; April Achter; Martin Weinstock; Lawrence Eichenfield; Latrice C Pichon; Gabriel R Galindo Journal: Prev Med Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Stephen W Dusza; Allan C Halpern; Jaya M Satagopan; Susan A Oliveria; Martin A Weinstock; Alon Scope; Marianne Berwick; Alan C Geller Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2012-01-23 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Deann Lazovich; Rachel Isaksson Vogel; Marianne Berwick; Martin A Weinstock; Erin M Warshaw; Kristin E Anderson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2011-10-20 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Darren Mays; Jessica Donze Black; Revonda B Mosher; Aziza T Shad; Kenneth P Tercyak Journal: J Cancer Surviv Date: 2011-02-27 Impact factor: 4.442
Authors: Carolyn J Heckman; Elizabeth A Handorf; Susan D Darlow; Lee M Ritterband; Sharon L Manne Journal: Health Psychol Date: 2016-11-07 Impact factor: 4.267
Authors: Karen Glanz; Kathryn Volpicelli; Christopher Jepson; Michael E Ming; Lynn M Schuchter; Katrina Armstrong Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-11-28 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Eleni Linos; Elizabeth Keiser; Matthew Kanzler; Kristin L Sainani; Wayne Lee; Eric Vittinghoff; Mary-Margaret Chren; Jean Y Tang Journal: Cancer Causes Control Date: 2011-11-02 Impact factor: 2.506