Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Validity of Self-reported Cancer History: A Comparison of Health Interview Data and Cancer Registry Records

Validity of Self-reported Cancer History: A Comparison of Health Interview Data and Cancer... Few studies have addressed the accuracy of self-reported cancer history, although epidemiologic studies routinely use self-reported information as the sole source of exposure or outcome data or as a criterion for exclusion from study participation. In this paper, false-negative reporting of cancer history is examined in a community-based sample by comparing interview data with tumor registry records. Subjects were participants in the 1980 New Haven Epidemiologic Catchment Area study; in 1995, cancer records (from 1935 onward) were obtained by linking the sample to the Connecticut Tumor Registry. Analyses focused on 263 individuals who had at least one tumor reported to the Connecticut Tumor Registry prior to participation in the Epidemiologic Catchment Area study. The overall rate of false-negative reporting was 39.2%. Logistic regression analysis revealed that false-negative reporting was significantly associated with non-White race, older age, increased time since cancer diagnosis, number of previous tumors, and type of cancer treatment received. In addition, false-negative reporting varied widely by cancer site, ranging from 0% for melanoma skin cancer to 83.3% for central nervous system cancers. The false-negative rate for breast cancer was 20.8%, that for colon and prostate cancers was 42.1%, and that for bladder cancer was 61.5%. Implications of these findings for prevalence estimation and future epidemiologic studies are discussed. Key words http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png American Journal of Epidemiology Oxford University Press

Validity of Self-reported Cancer History: A Comparison of Health Interview Data and Cancer Registry Records

Validity of Self-reported Cancer History: A Comparison of Health Interview Data and Cancer Registry Records

American Journal of Epidemiology , Volume 153 (3) – Feb 1, 2001

Abstract

Few studies have addressed the accuracy of self-reported cancer history, although epidemiologic studies routinely use self-reported information as the sole source of exposure or outcome data or as a criterion for exclusion from study participation. In this paper, false-negative reporting of cancer history is examined in a community-based sample by comparing interview data with tumor registry records. Subjects were participants in the 1980 New Haven Epidemiologic Catchment Area study; in 1995, cancer records (from 1935 onward) were obtained by linking the sample to the Connecticut Tumor Registry. Analyses focused on 263 individuals who had at least one tumor reported to the Connecticut Tumor Registry prior to participation in the Epidemiologic Catchment Area study. The overall rate of false-negative reporting was 39.2%. Logistic regression analysis revealed that false-negative reporting was significantly associated with non-White race, older age, increased time since cancer diagnosis, number of previous tumors, and type of cancer treatment received. In addition, false-negative reporting varied widely by cancer site, ranging from 0% for melanoma skin cancer to 83.3% for central nervous system cancers. The false-negative rate for breast cancer was 20.8%, that for colon and prostate cancers was 42.1%, and that for bladder cancer was 61.5%. Implications of these findings for prevalence estimation and future epidemiologic studies are discussed. Key words

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/validity-of-self-reported-cancer-history-a-comparison-of-health-01ukiXBFQR

References (29)

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
Copyright © 2015 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
ISSN
0002-9262
eISSN
1476-6256
DOI
10.1093/aje/153.3.299
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Few studies have addressed the accuracy of self-reported cancer history, although epidemiologic studies routinely use self-reported information as the sole source of exposure or outcome data or as a criterion for exclusion from study participation. In this paper, false-negative reporting of cancer history is examined in a community-based sample by comparing interview data with tumor registry records. Subjects were participants in the 1980 New Haven Epidemiologic Catchment Area study; in 1995, cancer records (from 1935 onward) were obtained by linking the sample to the Connecticut Tumor Registry. Analyses focused on 263 individuals who had at least one tumor reported to the Connecticut Tumor Registry prior to participation in the Epidemiologic Catchment Area study. The overall rate of false-negative reporting was 39.2%. Logistic regression analysis revealed that false-negative reporting was significantly associated with non-White race, older age, increased time since cancer diagnosis, number of previous tumors, and type of cancer treatment received. In addition, false-negative reporting varied widely by cancer site, ranging from 0% for melanoma skin cancer to 83.3% for central nervous system cancers. The false-negative rate for breast cancer was 20.8%, that for colon and prostate cancers was 42.1%, and that for bladder cancer was 61.5%. Implications of these findings for prevalence estimation and future epidemiologic studies are discussed. Key words

Journal

American Journal of EpidemiologyOxford University Press

Published: Feb 1, 2001

There are no references for this article.