Validity of self-reported cancer: Comparison between self-report versus cancer registry records in the Geelong Osteoporosis Study.
Cancer
Epidemiologic studies
Health surveys
Neoplasms
Regional patients
Registries
Self-report
Sensitivity and specificity
Journal
Cancer epidemiology
ISSN: 1877-783X
Titre abrégé: Cancer Epidemiol
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101508793
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2020
10 2020
Historique:
received:
29
02
2020
revised:
17
07
2020
accepted:
21
07
2020
pubmed:
4
8
2020
medline:
26
1
2021
entrez:
4
8
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Determining the validity of self-reported data is important. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of self-reported cancer and investigate factors associated with accurate reporting in men and women. Study participants (n = 1727) from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study, located in south-eastern Australia, were utilised. Self-reported cancer data were compared to Victorian Cancer Registry records. Age, socioeconomic status (SES), education and time between cancer diagnosis and study appointment were investigated as factors associated with accuracy of self-report. There were 142 participants who self-reported a cancer and 135 with a VCR record. Comparing self-report to any registry record, sensitivity was 63.7 %, specificity 96.5 %, PPV 60.6 %, NPV 96.9 %, and overall agreement ĸ0.588. Comparing exact-match records, sensitivity was 58.8 %, specificity 95.5 %, PPV 49.3 %, NPV 96.9 % and overall agreement ĸ0.499. In logistic regression models, post-secondary education was independently associated with accuracy of any (OR 1.72, 95 % CI 1.10-2.70) and exact-match (OR 1.59, 95 % CI 1.05-2.42) self-report, compared to cancer registry record. For any cancer, being aged >70 years was inversely associated with accuracy (OR 0.24, 95 % CI 0.15-0.38). Likewise, for matched cancer reporting, those aged 60-70 years (OR 0.51, 95 %CI 0.30-0.88) and >70 years (OR 0.23, 95 % CI 0.15-0.35) were less accurate. No other significant associations were detected. Results suggest moderate agreement between self-report and registry data for any cancer among men and women. However, when comparing self-report to registry data for exact-match cancer type, level of overall agreement deteriorated. Self-report cancer data may be acceptable for determining a history of cancer, although, is less accurate in identifying history of specific cancer types documented in registry-based data.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Determining the validity of self-reported data is important. The aim of this study was to assess the validity of self-reported cancer and investigate factors associated with accurate reporting in men and women.
METHODS
Study participants (n = 1727) from the Geelong Osteoporosis Study, located in south-eastern Australia, were utilised. Self-reported cancer data were compared to Victorian Cancer Registry records. Age, socioeconomic status (SES), education and time between cancer diagnosis and study appointment were investigated as factors associated with accuracy of self-report.
RESULTS
There were 142 participants who self-reported a cancer and 135 with a VCR record. Comparing self-report to any registry record, sensitivity was 63.7 %, specificity 96.5 %, PPV 60.6 %, NPV 96.9 %, and overall agreement ĸ0.588. Comparing exact-match records, sensitivity was 58.8 %, specificity 95.5 %, PPV 49.3 %, NPV 96.9 % and overall agreement ĸ0.499. In logistic regression models, post-secondary education was independently associated with accuracy of any (OR 1.72, 95 % CI 1.10-2.70) and exact-match (OR 1.59, 95 % CI 1.05-2.42) self-report, compared to cancer registry record. For any cancer, being aged >70 years was inversely associated with accuracy (OR 0.24, 95 % CI 0.15-0.38). Likewise, for matched cancer reporting, those aged 60-70 years (OR 0.51, 95 %CI 0.30-0.88) and >70 years (OR 0.23, 95 % CI 0.15-0.35) were less accurate. No other significant associations were detected.
CONCLUSION
Results suggest moderate agreement between self-report and registry data for any cancer among men and women. However, when comparing self-report to registry data for exact-match cancer type, level of overall agreement deteriorated. Self-report cancer data may be acceptable for determining a history of cancer, although, is less accurate in identifying history of specific cancer types documented in registry-based data.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32745997
pii: S1877-7821(20)30124-7
doi: 10.1016/j.canep.2020.101790
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
101790Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.