Laura Paalanen1, Päivikki Koponen1, Tiina Laatikainen1,2,3, Hanna Tolonen1. 1. Department of Public Health Solutions, National Institute for Health and Welfare (THL), Helsinki, Finland. 2. Institute of Public Health and Clinical Nutrition, School of Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland. 3. Siun Sote-Joint Municipal Authority for North Karelia Social and Health Services, Joensuu, Finland.
Abstract
Background: Three data sources are generally used in monitoring health on the population level. Health interview surveys (HISs) are based on participants' self-report. Health examination surveys (HESs) yield more objective data, and also persons who are unaware of their elevated risks can be detected. Medical records (MRs) and other administrative registers also provide objective data, but their availability, coverage and quality vary between countries. We summarized studies comparing self-reported data with (i) measured data from HESs or (ii) MRs. We aimed to describe differences in feasibility and comparability of different data sources for monitoring (i) elevated blood pressure or hypertension (ii) elevated blood glucose or diabetes and (iii) elevated total cholesterol. Methods: We conducted a literature search to identify studies, which validated self-reported measures against objective measures. We found 30 studies published since the year 2000 fulfilling our inclusion criteria (targeted to adults and comparing prevalence among the same persons). Results: Hypertension and elevated total cholesterol were prone to be under-estimated in HISs. The under-estimate was more pronounced, when the HIS data were compared with HES data, and lower when compared with MRs. For diabetes, the HISs and the objective methods resulted in fairly similar prevalence rates. Conclusion: The three data sources measure different manifestations of the risk factors and cannot be expected to yield similar prevalence rates. Using HIS data only may lead to under-estimation of elevated risk factor levels or disease prevalence. Whenever possible, information from the three data sources should be evaluated and combined.
Background: Three data sources are generally used in monitoring health on the population level. Health interview surveys (HISs) are based on participants' self-report. Health examination surveys (HESs) yield more objective data, and also persons who are unaware of their elevated risks can be detected. Medical records (MRs) and other administrative registers also provide objective data, but their availability, coverage and quality vary between countries. We summarized studies comparing self-reported data with (i) measured data from HESs or (ii) MRs. We aimed to describe differences in feasibility and comparability of different data sources for monitoring (i) elevated blood pressure or hypertension (ii) elevated blood glucose or diabetes and (iii) elevated total cholesterol. Methods: We conducted a literature search to identify studies, which validated self-reported measures against objective measures. We found 30 studies published since the year 2000 fulfilling our inclusion criteria (targeted to adults and comparing prevalence among the same persons). Results:Hypertension and elevated total cholesterol were prone to be under-estimated in HISs. The under-estimate was more pronounced, when the HIS data were compared with HES data, and lower when compared with MRs. For diabetes, the HISs and the objective methods resulted in fairly similar prevalence rates. Conclusion: The three data sources measure different manifestations of the risk factors and cannot be expected to yield similar prevalence rates. Using HIS data only may lead to under-estimation of elevated risk factor levels or disease prevalence. Whenever possible, information from the three data sources should be evaluated and combined.
Authors: Mohammed Alluhidan; Reem F Alsukait; Taghred Alghaith; Rana Saber; Adwa Alamri; Saleh Al-Muhsen; Fahad Alhowaitan; Abdulmohsen Alqarni; Christopher H Herbst; Nahar Alazemi; Ahmad S Hersi Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2022-09-21
Authors: Katri Kilpeläinen; Päivikki Koponen; Hanna Tolonen; Seppo Koskinen; Katja Borodulin; Mika Gissler Journal: Arch Public Health Date: 2019-11-13