Validity and Reliability of Self-reported Diabetes in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study

被引:178
|
作者
Schneider, Andrea L. C. [1 ,2 ]
Pankow, James S. [3 ]
Heiss, Gerardo [4 ]
Selvin, Elizabeth [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Dept Epidemiol, Bloomberg Sch Publ Hlth, Baltimore, MD USA
[2] Johns Hopkins Univ, Welch Ctr Prevent Epidemiol & Clin Res, Baltimore, MD USA
[3] Univ Minnesota, Div Epidemiol & Community Hlth, Minneapolis, MN USA
[4] Univ N Carolina, Dept Epidemiol, Gillings Sch Global Publ Hlth, Chapel Hill, NC USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
diabetes; validation study; CHRONIC DISEASES; HYPERTENSION; AGREEMENT; ACCURACY;
D O I
10.1093/aje/kws156
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
The objective of this study was to assess the validity of prevalent and incident self-reported diabetes compared with multiple reference definitions and to assess the reliability (repeatability) of a self-reported diagnosis of diabetes. Data from 10,321 participants in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study who attended visit 4 (19961998) were analyzed. Prevalent self-reported diabetes was compared with reference definitions defined by fasting glucose and medication use obtained at visit 4. Incident self-reported diabetes was assessed during annual follow-up telephone calls and was compared with reference definitions defined by fasting glucose, hemoglobin A1c, and medication use obtained during an in-person visit attended by a subsample of participants (n 1,738) in 20042005. The sensitivity of prevalent self-reported diabetes ranged from 58.5 to 70.8, and specificity ranged from 95.6 to 96.8, depending on the reference definition. Similarly, the sensitivity of incident self-reported diabetes ranged from 55.9 to 80.4, and specificity ranged from 84.5 to 90.6. Percent positive agreement of self-reported diabetes during 9 years of repeat assessments ranged from 92.7 to 95.4. Both prevalent self-reported diabetes and incident self-reported diabetes were 8497 specific and 5580 sensitive as compared with reference definitions using glucose and medication criteria. Self-reported diabetes was 92 reliable over time.
引用
收藏
页码:738 / 743
页数:6
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Validity and Reliability of Self-Reported Diabetes
    Schneider, Andrea L.
    Pankow, James S.
    Heiss, Gerardo
    Selvin, Elizabeth
    [J]. DIABETES, 2012, 61 : A382 - A383
  • [2] VALIDITY RELIABILITY STUDY OF SELF-REPORTED DRINKING
    WILLIAMS, G
    AITKEN, S
    MALIN, H
    [J]. ALCOHOLISM-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH, 1983, 7 (01) : 126 - 126
  • [3] On the validity and reliability of self-reported vote: Validity without reliability?
    Andersson, HE
    Granberg, D
    [J]. QUALITY & QUANTITY, 1997, 31 (02) : 127 - 140
  • [4] On the validity and reliability of self-reported vote: validity without reliability?
    Hans E. Andersson
    Donald Granberg
    [J]. Quality and Quantity, 1997, 31 : 127 - 140
  • [5] Accuracy of Self-Reported Heart Failure. The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study
    Camplain, Ricky
    Kucharska-Newton, Anna
    Loehr, Laura
    Keyserling, Thomas C.
    Layton, J. Bradley
    Wruck, Lisa
    Folsom, Aaron R.
    Bertoni, Alain G.
    Heiss, Gerardo
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CARDIAC FAILURE, 2017, 23 (11) : 802 - 808
  • [6] THE RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF SELF-REPORTED WEIGHT AND HEIGHT
    STEWART, AL
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CHRONIC DISEASES, 1982, 35 (04): : 295 - 309
  • [7] VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY OF SELF-REPORTED DRUG USE
    WHITEHEAD, PC
    SMART, RG
    [J]. CANADIAN JOURNAL OF CRIMINOLOGY AND CORRECTIONS, 1972, 14 (01): : 83 - 89
  • [8] Self-reported delinquency studies: origins, reliability and validity
    Aebi, Marcelo F.
    Jaquier, Veronique
    [J]. DEVIANCE ET SOCIETE, 2008, 32 (02): : 205 - 227
  • [9] Reliability and validity of self-reported symptoms for predicting vulvodynia
    Reed, Barbara D.
    Haefner, Hope K.
    Harlow, Sioban D.
    Gorenflo, Daniel W.
    Sen, Ananda
    [J]. OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2006, 108 (04): : 906 - 913
  • [10] RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF SELF-REPORTED DELINQUENCY STUDIES - REVIEW
    SINGH, A
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGICAL REPORTS, 1979, 44 (03) : 987 - 993