Agreement of offspring-reported parental smoking status: the RHINESSA generation study.
Agreement
Generation study
Parental smoking
Self-report
Sensitivity
Smoking during pregnancy
Specificity
Tobacco smoking
Validation study
Journal
BMC public health
ISSN: 1471-2458
Titre abrégé: BMC Public Health
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100968562
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 Jan 2019
21 Jan 2019
Historique:
received:
03
04
2018
accepted:
07
01
2019
entrez:
23
1
2019
pubmed:
23
1
2019
medline:
18
4
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
With increasing interest in exposure effects across generations, it is crucial to assess the validity of information given on behalf of others. To compare adult's report of their parent's smoking status against parent's own report and examine predictors for discrepant answers. We studied 7185 offspring (18-51 years) and one of their parents, n = 5307 (27-67 years) participating in the Respiratory Health in Northern Europe, Spain and Australia (RHINESSA) generation study. Information about parent's smoking status during offspring's childhood and mother's smoking status during pregnancy was obtained by questionnaires from parents and their offspring. We calculated sensitivity, specificity and Cohen's Kappa [κ] for agreement using parent's own report as the gold standard. We performed logistic regression to examine if offspring's sex, age, educational level, asthma status, own smoking status or parental status, as well as the parent's sex and amount of smoking during childhood predicted disagreement. The sensitivity for offspring's correct report of parent's smoking status during childhood (0-10 years) was 0.82 (95% CI 0.81-0.84), specificity was 0.95 (95% CI 0.95-0.96) and a good agreement was observed, κ = 0.79 (95% CI 0.78-0.80). Offspring's report of mothers' smoking status during pregnancy showed a lower sensitivity, 0.66 (95% CI 0.60-0.71), a slightly lower specificity, 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.95) and a good agreement, κ = 0.61 (95% CI 0.55-0.67). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, offspring not having children was a predictor for discrepant answers (odds ratio [OR] 2.11 [95% CI 1.21-3.69]). Low amount of parents' tobacco consumption, < 10 cigarettes/day (OR 2.72 [95% CI 1.71-4.31]) also predicted disagreement compared to ≥10 cigarettes per day, and so did offspring's reports of fathers' smoking status (OR 1.73 [95% CI 1.09-2.74]) compared to mothers' smoking status. Offspring's sex, asthma status, educational level, smoking status or age was not related to discrepant answers. Adults report their parent's smoking status during their childhood, as well as their mother' smoking status when pregnant with them, quite accurately. In the absence of parents' direct report, offspring's reports could be valuable.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
With increasing interest in exposure effects across generations, it is crucial to assess the validity of information given on behalf of others.
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
To compare adult's report of their parent's smoking status against parent's own report and examine predictors for discrepant answers.
METHODS
METHODS
We studied 7185 offspring (18-51 years) and one of their parents, n = 5307 (27-67 years) participating in the Respiratory Health in Northern Europe, Spain and Australia (RHINESSA) generation study. Information about parent's smoking status during offspring's childhood and mother's smoking status during pregnancy was obtained by questionnaires from parents and their offspring. We calculated sensitivity, specificity and Cohen's Kappa [κ] for agreement using parent's own report as the gold standard. We performed logistic regression to examine if offspring's sex, age, educational level, asthma status, own smoking status or parental status, as well as the parent's sex and amount of smoking during childhood predicted disagreement.
RESULTS
RESULTS
The sensitivity for offspring's correct report of parent's smoking status during childhood (0-10 years) was 0.82 (95% CI 0.81-0.84), specificity was 0.95 (95% CI 0.95-0.96) and a good agreement was observed, κ = 0.79 (95% CI 0.78-0.80). Offspring's report of mothers' smoking status during pregnancy showed a lower sensitivity, 0.66 (95% CI 0.60-0.71), a slightly lower specificity, 0.92 (95% CI 0.90-0.95) and a good agreement, κ = 0.61 (95% CI 0.55-0.67). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, offspring not having children was a predictor for discrepant answers (odds ratio [OR] 2.11 [95% CI 1.21-3.69]). Low amount of parents' tobacco consumption, < 10 cigarettes/day (OR 2.72 [95% CI 1.71-4.31]) also predicted disagreement compared to ≥10 cigarettes per day, and so did offspring's reports of fathers' smoking status (OR 1.73 [95% CI 1.09-2.74]) compared to mothers' smoking status. Offspring's sex, asthma status, educational level, smoking status or age was not related to discrepant answers.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Adults report their parent's smoking status during their childhood, as well as their mother' smoking status when pregnant with them, quite accurately. In the absence of parents' direct report, offspring's reports could be valuable.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30665381
doi: 10.1186/s12889-019-6414-0
pii: 10.1186/s12889-019-6414-0
pmc: PMC6341700
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
94Subventions
Organisme : The Faculty of Health, Aarhus University, Denmark
ID : 240008
Organisme : The Wood Dust Foundation
ID : 444508795
Organisme : The Norwegian Research Council
ID : 135773/330
Organisme : HelseVest Norway
ID : 911 631
Organisme : NFR
ID : 214123, 230827/F20, 228174
Organisme : The Estonian Science Foundation
ID : 4350
Organisme : The Estonian Research Council
ID : PUT562
Organisme : Horizon2020 PHC1
ID : 633212
Organisme : The Danish Working Environment Research Fund
ID : 17-2015-09 / 20150067134
Références
Genet Epidemiol. 1999;17(2):141-50
pubmed: 10414557
Nicotine Tob Res. 2007 Oct;9(10):1005-13
pubmed: 17852766
Am J Med Genet B Neuropsychiatr Genet. 2009 Jan 5;150B(1):41-9
pubmed: 18449865
Epidemiology. 2008 Jul;19(4):628-33
pubmed: 18467961
Nicotine Tob Res. 2009 Jan;11(1):12-24
pubmed: 19246437
BMC Public Health. 2009 Mar 04;9:74
pubmed: 19261172
Thorax. 2010 Jan;65(1):14-20
pubmed: 19729360
Nicotine Tob Res. 2016 Jan;18(1):79-83
pubmed: 25895950
Int J Epidemiol. 1989 Dec;18(4):882-7
pubmed: 2621025
Int J Epidemiol. 2017 Feb 1;46(1):235-245
pubmed: 27565179
Am J Epidemiol. 2017 May 15;185(10):974-981
pubmed: 28430851
Am J Public Health. 1994 Jul;84(7):1086-93
pubmed: 8017530