Abstract
Changes over a 2-week period in self-reported health and lifestyle information were examined and related to medical feedback provided prior to the second self-report. The study group consisted of 128 females and 73 males ranging in age from 35 to 85 with a mean age of 55.5 years. On two occasions subjects completed self-assessment questionnaires including 52 items covering symptomatology and various lifestyle behaviours. Before the second self-assessment, subjects were classified as cases if their blood pressure was borderline or hypertensive according to World Health Organization guidelines or as controls otherwise. Subjects were informed of this classification. Across questions, the percentage disagreement between reports ranged from 0.0% to 44.1% with a median of 17.5% and with case–control differences significant at the 10% level for four questions. The mean difference between responses was significantly different from 0 at the 10% level for 15 questions with case–control differences significant at the 10% level for 6 questions. For 2 questions, the significance level of the association of response with case–control status changed from a value greater than 20% based on responses before feedback to a value less than 5% based on responses after feedback. Some evidence of recall bias was found.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 6 print issues and online access
$259.00 per year
only $43.17 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on SpringerLink
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Barry D Differential recall bias and spurious associations in case–control studies, Stat Med (1996) 15: 2603–2616
Barry D The assessment of exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke, Environ Int (1997) 23: 17–31
Boffetta P Agudo A Ahrens W Benhamou E Benhamou S Darby SC Ferro G Fortes C Gonzales CA Jockel KH Krauss M Kreienbrock L Kreuzer M Mendes A Merletti F Nyberg F Pershagen G Pohlabein H Riboli E Schmid G Simonato L Tredaniel J Whitley E Wichmann HE Winck C Zambon P Saracci R Multicenter case–control study of exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and lung cancer in Europe, J Natl Cancer Inst (1998) 90: 1440–1450
Friedenreich CM Howe GR Miller AB An investigation of recall bias in the reporting of past food intake among breast cancer cases and controls, Ann Epidemiol (1991a) 1: 439–453
Friedenreich CM Howe GR Miller AB The effect of recall bias in the association of calorie-providing nutrients and breast cancer, Epidemiology (1991b) 2: 424–429
Friedenreich CM Howe GR Miller AB Recall bias in the association of micronutrient intake and breast cancer, J Clin Epidemiol (1993) 9: 1009–1017
Gibbons LE Ponsonby AL Dwyer T A comparison of prospective and retrospective responses on sudden infant death syndrome by case and control mothers, Am J Epidemiol (1993) 137: 654–659
Herrmann N Retrospective information from questionnaires: I. Comparability of primary respondents and their next-of-kin, Am J Epidemiol (1985) 121: 937–947
Holmberg L Ohlander EM Byers T Zack M Wolk A Bruce A Bergstrom R Bergkvist L Adami HO A search for recall bias in a case–control study of diet and breast cancer, Int J Epidemiol (1996) 25: 235–244
Humble CG Samet JM Skipper BE Comparison of self-and surrogate-reported dietary information, Am J Epidemiol (1984) 119: 86–98
Lindefors-Harris B-M Eklund G Adami HO Merik O Response bias in a case–control study: analysis utilizing comparative data concerning legal abortions from two independent Swedish studies, Am J Epidemiol (1991) 134: 1003–1008
Lippman A Mackenzie SG What is “recall bias” and does it exist? In: Marois M. (Ed.) Prevention of physical and mental congenital defects: Part C. Basic and medical science, education, and future strategies. Alan R. Liss, NY 1985 pp 205–209
National Institutes of Health The sixth annual report of the joint national committee on prevention, detection, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure NIH Publication No. 98-4080 1997
Nyberg F Agudo A Boffetta P Fortes C Gonzalez CA Pershagen G A European validation study of smoking and environmental tobacco smoke exposure in non-smoking lung cancer cases and controls, Cancer Causes Control (1998) 9: 173–182
Paganini-Hill A Ross RK Reliability of recall of drug usage and other health-related information, Am J Epidemiol (1982) 116: 114–122
Patrick DL Cheadle A Thompson DC Diehr P Koepsell T Kinne S The validity of self-reported smoking: a review and meta-analysis, Am J Public Health (1994) 84: 1086–1093
Stolley PD Tonascia JA Sartwell PE Tockman MS Tonascia S Rutledge A Schinnar R Agreement rates between oral contraceptive users and prescribers in relation to drug use histories, Am J Epidemiol (1978) 107: 226–235
Weinstock MA Colditz GA Willet WC Stampfer MJ Rosner B Speizer FE Recall (report) bias and reliability in the retrospective assessment of melanoma risk, Am J Epidemiol (1991) 133: 240–245
WHO MONICA Project MONICA manual. World Health Organization, Cardiovascular Diseases Unit, Geneva 1990 November
WHO Expert Committee Prevention of coronary heart disease. World Health Organization, Geneva 1982 Technical Report Series, 678
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
BARRY, D., HOGAN, M. A comparison of responses to a health and lifestyle questionnaire completed before and then after blood pressure screening. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 12, 244–251 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jea.7500223
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jea.7500223